Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
Advertisement
Markets
09 July 2025 by Maja Garaca Djurdjevic

SEC clarity sets stage for Australia’s next crypto ETF push

Australia’s cryptocurrency ETF market could be poised for its next wave of development as US regulators open the door to a broader suite of digital ...
icon

Defence and precious metals top ETF charts in first half of 2025

Defence and precious metals have emerged as the strongest-performing ETF sectors over the past six months, fuelled by ...

icon

‘This is a new RBA’: Economists caught off guard by surprise decision

Economists have been left scrambling to recalibrate after the Reserve Bank wrong-footed markets on Tuesday, holding the ...

icon

Diversified strategies power double-digit super returns over volatile year

Brighter Super and Mercer Super have reported double-digit returns, crediting diversified strategies and long-term focus ...

icon

Institutional investors ‘aggressively’ buying into risk

Institutional investors have increased their risk exposure over June amid tempered levels of market volatility

icon

GQG warns of flow headwinds as funds lag benchmarks

Inflows for the first half of 2025 for GQG Partners stand at US$8 billion, but the firm has flagged fund ...

VIEW ALL

MIS operator gets six-year ban

  •  
By Alice Uribe
  •  
2 minute read

The operator of a South Australian MIS business gets a six-year ban after an ASIC investigation.

Jonathan West has been banned from providing financial services for six years after an ASIC investigation into his private managed investment business.

The ban comes after proceedings were brought by ASIC in the Supreme Court of South Australia and follow a decision by Justice Gray on 9 May 2008.

ASIC found that between June 2003 and March 2007, John West and the business John West & Associates (JWA) operated a managed investment scheme (MIS) that was not registered and did not hold an Australian financial services licence.

JWA also did not provide a product disclosure statement to potential investors and made offers or accepted offers from retail clients to acquire interests in the scheme when it was not registered.

 
 

Despite being put on notice in May 2005 that the scheme was contravening the Corporations Act 2001, West continued to operate the scheme.

ASIC also found that West intended to circumvent a restraining order made by the Supreme Court in March 2007 by continuing to solicit funds from investors in the scheme.

The managed investment business engaged in a scheme of borrowing money from members of the public to on-lend to others on the security of mortgages. It involved more than 60 investors with loans and contributions totalling more than $15.2 million.