Username:
Password:
Forgot Password?

20 February 07 Christopher Giles Fearon CA of Australian Capital Territory
Print this Article Print this Article
Email this Article

20 February 2007  
 
Christopher Giles Fearon CA of Australian Capital Territory 
 
On his own admission the Tribunal found a case established that Mr Fearon was liable to disciplinary action in accordance with By-law 40(e), in that:

    (a) on 13 September 2005 a delegate of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) disqualified him under subsection 120A(1) and 120A(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (the SIS Act) from being a trustee, investment manager or custodian of a regulated superannuation entity or a responsible officer of a body corporate that is a trustee, investment manager or custodian of a regulated superannuation entity, with the disqualification being confirmed by a delegate of APRA on 28 November 2005 and subsequently affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 30 October 2006. 
     
    (b) on 6 October 2005 a delegate of APRA disqualified him under subsection 131(1) of the SIS Act from being an approved auditor for the purposes of the Act, with the disqualification being confirmed by a delegate of APRA on 8 December 2005 and subsequently affirmed on appeal by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 30 October 2006.
The decision of the Tribunal was that Mr Fearon be reprimanded and required to pay $600 plus GST towards the costs of the disciplinary action. In reaching its decision the Tribunal took into account Mr Fearon’s contrition, his transparency in dealing with the Institute, his previous good standing and the steps taken to remedy deficiencies that led to the misconduct.