
Publication
An overview of the Commonwealth’s model litigant obligation
Since the early 20th century, Australian courts have emphasised the obligation for the Commonwealth to act as a ‘model litigant’ in court proceedings.
United States | Publication | May 11, 2020
The two-year Treasury yield hit a record low last week. Unattractive interest rates and a volatile stock market will cause investors to look for larger returns without involvement in the stock market. History teaches us that this combination leaves investors vulnerable to the lure of a Ponzi scheme.
Registered representatives, too, will be looking for alternatives for their customers that can give them the returns that more traditional investments currently cannot provide. Some representatives may also need more cash themselves, as both investors and those in the industry may be feeling the "pinch" from the current economic turmoil. Increased selling away activity is likely to follow.
And finally, with both registered representatives and back offices working remotely, supervision may be more challenging than ever.
Firms would be well-served to review their field supervision operations (and make an internal record of having done so), and might consider the following additional measures:
Send a Field Supervision Alert reminding registered representatives of the following:
Send an investor education reminder to customers that:
A robust supervisory structure with written documentation is a firm's best defense to a selling away claim. A few alerts and written updates now may pay big dividends in the future if a defrauded investor seeks to hold the firm liable for the unauthorized activities of its registered representative.
Publication
Since the early 20th century, Australian courts have emphasised the obligation for the Commonwealth to act as a ‘model litigant’ in court proceedings.
Publication
The Companies and Limited Liability Partnerships (Annotation) Regulations 2025 and an accompanying Explanatory Memorandum were published on 14 May 2025.
Publication
In a recent decision, Matco Tools Corporation v. Canada (Attorney General), the Federal Court has overturned a Commissioner of Patents (the Commissioner) decision regarding a patent applicant failing to meet the “due care” standard in the context of an unpaid maintenance fee.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025