THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.: FSP15/2024

DECISION BY THE CHAIRPERSON

APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 230 OF THE FSR ACT 9 OF 2017

The application for reconsideration of the debarment is summarily dismissed in terms of sec 234(4) of the Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017.

First, the application is more than two years out of time. The condonation application cannot succeed because the applicant, with knowledge of his rights and the facts elected not to apply for reconsideration at the time. That is called 'peremption' and a waiver of the right to apply.

Second, the dismissal and debarment are separate issues and separate laws apply. The applicant was debarred under sec 14 and not by the registrar (the applicant refers to a repealed provision).

Section 14(9) states that

"A person debarred [by an FSP] in terms of subsection (1) may not render financial services or act as a representative or key individual of a representative of any financial services provider, unless the person has complied with the requirements referred to in section 13(1)(b)(ii) for the reappointment of a debarred person as a representative or key individual of a representative."

As the advocate for the Bank pointed out,

"Board Notice 82 of 2003 issued in terms of the FAIS Act sets out the requirements for the reappointment of debarred representatives in the position of Mr Sabeka. A guidance note was further issued by the FSCA on 18 December 2017 that further explains the rehabilitation process. It was incumbent on Mr Sabeka to follow these processes."

As to lack of honesty, it is not in dispute that the applicant dishonestly transferred an amount to fulfil his KPI target. Whether the client suffered any loss is beside the point.

LTC HARMS

Chairperson 30 July 2024