½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþhas accepted a court-enforceable undertaking from former financial adviser, Shivdeep Jaidka, from Melbourne, Victoria.Â
½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþconducted a review of the financial services provided by Mr Jaidka. Based on this review, ½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþformed the view that Mr Jaidka had failed to comply with s961B and s961G of the Corporations Act in relation to Self Managed Superannuation advice.Â
Under the terms of the undertaking, Mr Jaidka has agreed that he will not for a period of 5 years:Â
- carry on a financial services business,
- provide financial services, or
- act in a managerial capacity of any entity operating a financial services business or providing legal, accounting or other advisory services to a financial services business.
View ASIC's Court Enforceable undertakings register.
µþ²¹³¦°ì²µ°ù´Ç³Ü²Ô»åÌý
½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþmay accept a court enforceable undertaking to improve and enforce compliance with the law. Court enforceable undertakings are not always used as an alternative to other enforcement action, they can also be used to complement or enhance such actions.Â
½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþwill not usually accept a court enforceable undertaking:Â
- instead of pursuing criminal court proceedings,
- where the misconduct is deliberate or involves a high level of recklessness, or
- after a matter has been referred to an ½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþdelegate or another specialist body.
½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþgenerally requires that a court enforceable undertaking contains admissions that the party providing the undertaking contravened legislative provisions. If the party does not comply with the undertakings, ½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþwill seek to enforce the undertaking through the court.Â
Further guidance on how ½ñÈÕÈÈÃÅʼþuses court enforceable undertakings can be found in Regulatory Guide 100 Court enforceable undertakings (RG 100).Ìý