Schedule A Free Call

AFSL Fundamentals

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Lanterne Fund

ASIC v Lanterne Fund Services Pty Limited [2024] FCA 353 has broader implications for AFSL holders, particularly businesses operating through corporate authorised representatives and authorised representatives. The decision reinforces that licensees remain responsible for effective supervision, risk management, competent responsible managers, adequate resourcing and representative training, and cannot rely principally on self-attestation, informal oversight or outsourced functions to satisfy their statutory obligations.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Oztures Trading Pty Ltd [2026]

ASIC v Oztures Trading Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 509 examines Binance Australia Derivatives’ systemic misclassification of retail clients as wholesale clients or sophisticated investors. The decision highlights the need for legally valid onboarding controls, Australian-law-specific training and effective retail product protections.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v DOD Bookkeeping Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (No 2) [2025] FCA 395

ASIC v DOD Bookkeeping Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2025] FCA 395 examines systemic failures in SMSF property advice, vertically integrated conflicts and transaction-linked adviser bonuses. The decision highlights licensee responsibility for client-specific advice, remuneration governance and monitoring of predetermined advice models.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Limited [2024] FCA 850

ASIC v Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Ltd [2024] FCA 850 is a major Australian greenwashing decision concerning misleading ESG exclusion claims. The case confirms that superannuation trustees and fund managers must ensure sustainability statements reflect actual portfolio holdings, including indirect and pooled exposures.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v BPS Financial Pty Ltd (Penalty) [2026] FCA 18

ASIC v BPS Financial Pty Ltd (Penalty) [2026] FCA 18 has broader implications for crypto, fintech and digital payment businesses. The decision reinforces functional product regulation, strict licensing expectations, personal responsibility for marketing claims and the need to substantiate statements about liquidity, merchant growth and regulatory approval.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v United Super Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1453

In ASIC v United Super Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1453, the Federal Court imposed $23.5 million in penalties over unreasonable delays in death, terminal illness and disability claims, together with breach-reporting failures. The decision reinforces trustee accountability for outsourced claims handling, data quality, remediation and timely escalation.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v FIIG Securities Limited [2026] FCA 92

In ASIC v FIIG Securities Limited [2026] FCA 92, the Federal Court imposed a $2.5 million penalty for systemic cybersecurity failures under FIIG’s AFSL obligations. The decision confirms that cybersecurity is a core licensing, resource and risk-management issue requiring effective controls, skilled personnel and board-level oversight.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Telstra Super Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 527

In ASIC v Telstra Super Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 527, the Federal Court found failures in Telstra Super’s internal dispute resolution processes, including late responses and deficient delay notices. The decision clarifies the legal force of RG 271-aligned IDR procedures and the limits of complaint-handling exceptions.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Wealth & Risk Management Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 59

In ASIC v Wealth & Risk Management Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 59, the Federal Court imposed $7.8 million in penalties over a conflicted “fast cash” advice model targeting financially distressed consumers. The case also featured expert evidence from Sean Graham, founder of Assured Support, on reasonable AFSL compliance, supervision and governance controls.
Read Case Insight

CASE INSIGHT

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Westpac Banking Corporation (Omnibus) [2022] FCA 515

In ASIC v Westpac Banking Corporation (Omnibus) [2022] FCA 515, the Federal Court imposed $113 million in penalties across six proceedings involving systemic fee, insurance, debt-sale and customer-account failures. The decision reinforces the independent obligation to provide financial services efficiently, honestly and fairly, supported by effective systems, records and remediation.
Read Case Insight

Step 1 of 8 - Your Role

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Assess your ASIC exposure

Answer a few targeted questions to identify where your compliance may not stand up under ASIC review.

Takes less than 2 minutes. No preparation required.

What best describes your role?