Tribunal sets aside debarment of consultant who changed record of advice
The far-reaching implications of debarment were not justified in the circumstances, the FST finds.
The applicant only became aware in May last year that the decision to debar her constituted administrative action.
Read moreThe far-reaching implications of debarment were not justified in the circumstances, the FST finds.
Former Standard Bank staff contend that the FAIS Act did not apply to their debarment and conduct.
FST’s decision reveals a litany of problems with the procedure followed.
Applicant argues that non-compliance is not a contravention when the law does not provide for a penalty.
Applicant obtains High Court orders to get her share of ex-husband’s pension interest.
Labour legislation sets down the criteria that determine whether someone is an employee.
JSE imposes fines totalling R15 million and bars Steinhoff’s former chief executive from holding office as a director.
Can a director be held criminally liable for acts or transgressions by a company?
Prudential Authority fined them an effective R2.688m for contraventions of the Short-term Insurance Act and the Insurance Act.
How does section 218 of the Financial Sector Regulation Act define what ‘a decision’ is?
A single act of dishonesty, incompetence, mismanagement or negligence may not by itself be grounds for debarment.
This case sends a serious warning to those who allow “spotters” to work under their licence.
Tribunal draws attention to the effect of selling the franchise house business on the financial adviser agreement.
Discrepancy between the figures on his benefit statement and those on Sanlam’s website.
This is a year after the Financial Services Tribunal set aside the Authority’s penalty of almost R162 million.
The FSCA had already reduced the penalties and dropped the intention to debar for 10 years.