Tribunal Reduces ASIC Banning Order Against Milutin Petrovic from Six to Three Years
Media Release
20 January 2026
Tribunal Reduces ASIC Banning Order Against Milutin Petrovic from Six to Three Years
Mackay Chapman has secured a positive review outcome for our client, Milutin Petrovic, in his challenge to an ASIC banning order. The Administrative Review Tribunal, constituted by Senior Member M Harrowell, reduced the banning order from six to three years, effective from 24 January 2025.
The Tribunal's decision raises an important question about the proportionality of the enforcement action taken against Mr Petrovic. In reducing the ban from six to three years, the Tribunal made an express finding that the original six-year period was harsh and excessive.
The Tribunal identified several significant factors:
- There was no dishonesty or personal benefit to Mr Petrovic.
- ASIC did not allege that clients suffered financial loss directly from his breaches.
- Mr Petrovic had received training in the UGC business model and had been advised it was legally sound. He was operating within a structure designed by others at a company run by Joel Hewish, a director and financial adviser, who was recently banned by ASIC for 10 years.
- Mr Petrovic had maintained a clean compliance record prior to UGC and was not previously subject to disciplinary action.
- The banning order also created genuine financial hardship.
These factors do not erase Mr Petrovic's admitted breaches. Mr Petrovic rightfully acknowledged before the Tribunal that he had breached his duties to act in clients' best interests and provide appropriate advice.
But acknowledging these breaches is not the same as endorsing an escalation of sanction as ASIC had sought to do.
There is also a broader principle at play. Mr Petrovic was an employee, not the architect of the business model, not the director, not the strategic decision-maker. He implemented a system designed by others. In finding that he should face such extensive sanctions, ASIC's initial decision arguably created a misalignment between individual accountability and the role other individuals actually played within organisational structures.
The Tribunal's decision corrects that misalignment.
Mr Petrovic has indicated his willingness to undertake further training and accept appropriate supervision going forward. The three-year period now provides a defined timeframe within which he can demonstrate the matters of concern have been genuinely addressed.
Mackay Chapman acknowledges that many investors in the schemes that Mr Petrovic facilitated investment into have suffered significant losses, and in some cases investors are facing the possibility of significant erosions to their superannuation balances. ASIC's regulatory response in investigating this matter and taking administrative action was warranted.
But we think it important that enforcement actions, even when justified, remain subject to careful scrutiny about whether their scope is proportionate. The Tribunal decision demonstrates that ASIC had taken an overly heavy-handed approach in the first instance and a correction was required.
The Tribunal’s Decision has been published and is available here:
https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/ARTA/2025/2717.html
The contents of this article do not constitute legal advice and it is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. It is designed and intended as general information in summary form, current at the time of publication, for general informational purposes only. You should seek legal advice or other professional advice in relation to any particular legal matters you or your organisation may have.
