Bradley Grimm was unsuccessful in the Victorian Court of Appeal in his attempt to have his dishonesty conviction and prison term overturned.
On 5 September 2024, Grimm was convicted of three counts of engaging in dishonest conduct between February and November 2015, while running a financial services business.
He was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, with nine months to serve, and to be of good behaviour for a period of 18 months upon release pursuant to a recognisance in the amount of $5,000.
Grimm had earlier pleaded guilty to having dishonestly transferred funds between two of his clients’ self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) to three separate companies of which he was the sole director, and which had little market value: Thrive Lending Pty Ltd, Trade BTC Pty Ltd, and Beta Pharmacology Pty Ltd.
He also pleaded guilty to dishonestly transferring shares and convertible notes owned by his client’s SMSF into a company without adequately advising his client that he was the sole director and he had a personal interest in that company.
Grimm also failed to advise his client that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission had sought the winding up of entities related to him, including Ostrava Equities Pty Ltd, and that he was banned from providing financial services by order of the Federal Court.
On 3 October 2024, Grimm sought leave to appeal in the Supreme Court of Victoria against his conviction and sentence, on the basis of a miscarriage of justice and the sentence was manifestly excessive.
On 7 February 2025, the matter was heard by justices Priest, Forrest and Kennedy in the Court of Appeal (Victoria), who handed down their decision refusing the application for leave to appeal on 19 February 2025.
In their joint reasons, the Court rejected Grimm’s submissions as to why his conviction should be set aside, and in relation to penalty said: “Having regard to the serious objective criminality and degree of moral culpability involved [in his offending], there is simply no basis for the suggestion that the sentence was ‘wholly outside the range’. Rather, we consider it to be lenient.”
Grimm will serve the balance of his sentence.
