Mr Blazejczyk sought a review of the scope of ASIC’s banning order. He considered that the order should be limited to only prohibiting him from providing personal advice to retail clients, ASIC said in a public statement.

“Mr Blazejczyk did not contest ASIC’s findings that he had breached a financial services law and conceded that a five-year banning period was appropriate,” the corporate regulator said.

The AAT was not satisfied that a limited banning order of the type proposed by Mr Blazejczyk would provide sufficient general deterrence.

“It was also not satisfied that the proposed limited banning order would promote consumer confidence and professionalism in the financial services industry,” ASIC said.

“In addition, the AAT was not satisfied that a permissive banning order, which would allow Mr Blazejczyk to engage in specific financial services activities, would be adequate to promote the protective objectives of the licensing regime.”