Wang and Australian Securities and Investments Commission

The case of *Wang and Australian Securities and Investments Commission* concerned an appeal against a banning order issued by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). The applicant, Mr. Wang, was involved in multiple business enterprises and had held directorships in various companies. ASIC's decision to ban Mr. Wang was based on findings that he had breached financial services law, acted dishonestly, and was not of good fame and character.

The court was required to determine whether ASIC had sufficient grounds to issue a permanent banning order against Mr. Wang. Specifically, the court had to assess whether Mr. Wang had breached a financial services law, whether his conduct was dishonest, and whether he was of good fame and character, as required by section 920A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

The court found that Mr. Wang's evidence regarding his awareness of transactions and his reliance on his paralegal was not credible, noting his repeated claims of ignorance on important matters and his excuses for not reading emails carefully. While not all of Mr. Wang's communications were found to be dishonest, the court was satisfied that his payment of Dr. Guan's remaining funds to Vivid Quark Seychelles, a company controlled by his family and located offshore, at a time when Dr. Guan was claiming the money, constituted a dishonest act. This finding was supported by Mr. Wang's failure to ensure repayment of funds from Easy Capital Global or its successor, which had benefited at the expense of investors. The court held that dishonest conduct is incompatible with good fame and character, and that such conduct, even if not directly in contravention of the Corporations Act, was relevant to the assessment of good fame and character under section 920A(1)(d).

The court affirmed ASIC's decision, finding that Mr. Wang was not adequately trained and was not competent to provide financial services. Furthermore, the court was satisfied that Mr. Wang was not a person of good fame and character due to his dishonest act concerning the transfer of Dr. Guan's funds and his subsequent failure to facilitate repayment.