Decisions

Matthew John Hamilton and Braeden William Sinclair Lichti (aka Braeden Sinclair) [Findings]

BCSECCOM #:
2018 BCSECCOM 290
Document Type:
Findings
Published Date:
2018-10-10
Effective Date:
2018-10-09
Details:

2018 BCSECCOM 290

Click on the Adobe icon to launch the Acrobat Reader

Citation: Re Hamilton, 2018 BCSECCOM 290 Date: 20181009

Matthew John Hamilton and Braeden William Sinclair Lichti (aka Braeden Sinclair)

Panel

Nigel P. Cave

Vice Chair

Judith Downes

Commissioner

Gordon L. Holloway

Commissioner

Hearing Dates

February 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 26, 2018 March 6 and July 6, 2018

Submissions Completed

July 6, 2018

Date of Findings

October 9 2018

Appearing

Jennifer Whately

For the Executive Director

Patrick J. Sullivan

For Matthew John Hamilton

H. Roderick Anderson

For Braeden William Sinclair Lichti (aka Braeden Sinclair)

Findings

I. Introduction

[1] This is the liability portion of a hearing under sections 161(1) of the Securities Act, RSBC 1996, c. 418.

[2] On April 18, 2017, the executive director issued a notice of hearing against the respondents (2017 BCSECCOM 134).

[3] On November 6, 2017, the executive director amended the original notice of hearing (2017 BCSECCOM 339), such that the executive director alleged that:

a) Matthew John Hamilton, working together with Braeden William Sinclair Lichti, created a publicly trading shell company ideal for use in a securities manipulation by deceiving foreign regulators and the public;

b) Hamilton, together with Lichti:

i) created a company which Hamilton controlled by installing and impersonating nominee directors and officers;

2

ii) concealed Hamilton’s control over all the company’s shares by pretending to have independent shareholders;

iii) made false filings with US securities regulators to secure the company’s registration and public quotation of the shares; and

iv) sold secret control over all the shares in the publicly trading company; and

c) as a consequence of the forgoing, it is in the public interest that orders be made against the respondents.

[4] During the hearing, the executive director called six witnesses, tendered documentary evidence and provided written and oral submissions. Counsel for Hamilton and Lichti attended the hearing, tendered documentary evidence on behalf of their clients and provided written and oral submissions.

[5] The events that are described in the notice of hearing were originally investigated by both the Commission and the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC). References throughout to “Commission investigators”, unless it is material to distinguish between the two entities, generally refer to investigators from one or both of the commissions.

[6] Neither Hamilton nor Lichti testified during the hearing. However, transcripts of interviews of both of the respondents by Commission investigators were entered as exhibits in this proceeding. Descriptions below of Hamilton’s or Lichti’s evidence are references to their answers to questions from Commission investigators during those interviews.