Former Commonwealth Financial Planning Limited (CFPL) adviser Don Nguyen has been unsuccessful in securing a stay of an ASIC order banning him from providing financial services for seven years.
Nguyen appealed to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia (AAT) for a stay of the original ASIC order handed down in March.
In his appeal documentation dated 9 June, he argued a stay of the banning order should be granted on the grounds that he had not worked since he left CFPL in July 2009 and was not seeking employment due to stress, depression and anxiety he had suffered from that time until now.
He stated the circumstances meant he could not be considered a threat to investors or the general public, the document said.
To strengthen his case, he offered to enter into an agreement to refrain from providing financial advice until a substantive decision had been made about him.
Furthermore, the former CFPL authorised representative alleged ASIC's investigation into his activities was made in an unprofessional manner and was carried out poorly.
To this end, he claimed the corporate regulator's examination was based on information provided by a number of disgruntled former clients who had made "paper losses" purely as a result of the global financial crisis.
In addition, he also asked for his details to be suppressed as he and his family had suffered as a result of the publicity his banning order had received.
He also cited the FPA's intention to terminate his membership as another reason for the suppression he was seeking, the documents said.
AAT senior member Geri Ettinger dismissed both parts of the appeal on the grounds the public interest outweighed any personal hardship Nguyen or his family had suffered due to the ASIC banning order.
"If a stay were granted, Mr Nguyen would be permitted to provide financial services in circumstances where his conduct has been found by a delegate of ASIC to amount to serious breaches of the Corporations Act," Ettinger said.
"I accept the submissions of [ASIC] that in this case there is a significant public interest in the banning order which outweighs the consequences for [Nguyen] if a stay were not granted."
She also gave no credence to Nguyen's offer to enter an agreement not to provide financial advice anywhere in the world until a substantive decision had been made about the banning order.
"I find such offer of an undertaking in contradiction of Mr Nguyen's statements that he is not seeking work, and find it inappropriate in the circumstances that he enter into any such offer," she said.
The request for the suppression of Nguyen's details was also dismissed due to the right of the public to be fully informed.
"It is clearly of great importance that the competing interests of the applicant and the public must be weighed up in cases such as the present where the right of persons operating in a market arises to be fully informed about the circumstances in which they are trading," Ettinger said.
"Accordingly, there is nothing I have heard which convinces me that Mr Nguyen's name or identity should be suppressed, or that ASIC should not publish his name on its website or elsewhere as appropriate."
