ASIC has accepted a court-enforceable undertaking from former financial adviser, Shivdeep Jaidka, from Melbourne, Victoria. 

ASIC conducted a review of the financial services provided by Mr Jaidka. Based on this review, ASIC formed the view that Mr Jaidka had failed to comply with s961B and s961G of the Corporations Act in relation to Self Managed Superannuation advice. 

Under the terms of the undertaking, Mr Jaidka has agreed that he will not for a period of 5 years: 

• 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.

Background 

ASIC may 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. 

ASIC will not usually accept a court enforceable undertaking: 

• 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 ASIC delegate or another specialist body.

ASIC generally 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, ASIC will seek to enforce the undertaking through the court. 

Further guidance on how ASIC uses court enforceable undertakings can be found in Regulatory Guide 100 Court enforceable undertakings (RG 100).