The High Court has granted special leave to appeal a lifelong ASIC ban to a broker a judge once described as “loose with the truth” and as carrying a “massive bag of dishonest conduct” with him.
The corporate watchdog is planning to launch legal action soon over the banking industry’s fees for no service, and expects to secure $1 billion in compensation for customers, the Royal Commission heard Friday.
Westpac admits that it violated the Corporations Act by awarding high performance marks to a financial adviser whose work was flagged for compliance concerns during several internal reviews.
A judge has denied a Westpac unit’s bid to strike allegations that it knew about a $1.9 million Ponzi scheme from a class action alleging the bank aided the Ponzi schemer’s illegal conduct.
Embattled financial giant AMP on Tuesday criticised concerns raised by lawyers for the federal class actions about group members’ opt out rights, saying the concerns were a “red herring” in the fight against an order transferring their cases to the NSW Supreme Court.
AMP has slammed arguments that group members in four Federal Court class actions could face a jurisdictional limitation on their claims of disclosure breaches if their cases are transferred to state court, saying no such disadvantage exists.
IOOF subsidiary Australian Executive Trustees wants to expand the cross-claim it filed against insurance broker Willis Australia in the class action over the collapse of Provident Capital, two weeks after AET agreed to fork over $44.25 million to settle the matter.
The Federal Court offers group members in the shareholder class actions against AMP a major legal advantage over the NSW Supreme Court, lawyers for the federal cases have argued ahead of a hearing in the controversial jurisdictional battle.
National Australia Bank has issued a public apology after evidence this week at the Banking Royal Commission revealed the bank charged fees for no service and faces possible criminal charges.
A barrister for a class action against Radio Rentals has told the Federal Court the company’s “strange” lease contracts may have been worded solely to avoid its obligations under the Uniform Consumer Credit Code.