Register for the Macquarie Shield Master Fund Class Action

Gordon Legal has commenced a class action against Macquarie on behalf of investor, Rachelle Dessent in respect of the collapse of the Shield Master Fund.

Shield was a super fund that collapsed in late 2024, resulting in 6,000 Australians losing over $620 million of their hard-earned superannuation. Half of the people affected used Macquarie’s super platform to invest their super in Shield.

In early 2026, Macquarie claimed to have partly compensated the Shield investors.

Macquarie did not compensate investors for any returns their super should have earned over the period it was invested in Shield. This means that investors remain out of pocket by millions of dollars.

The class action alleges that Macquarie failed to conduct proper due diligence before it made Shield available for investment. If it had conducted a proper investigation of Shield, it would never have allowed people to invest their life savings into that fund.

If you believe you were affected by the collapse of the Shield Master Fund, and you invested your super via Macquarie, you can register your interest in the class action here

On 16 September 2026, Gordon Legal commenced a class action against Macquarie on behalf of Rachelle Dessent for its involvement in allowing people to invest in Shield.

The class action was commenced by Rachelle Dessent on her own behalf and on behalf of group members.

The class action is expected to be listed before the Supreme Court of Victoria for its first Case Management Hearing in the coming weeks.

If you believe you were affected by the collapse of the Shield Master Fund, you can register with us here.

How is the class action different from making an AFCA complaint?

An AFCA complaint and the Macquarie Shield Master Fund Class Action are different pathways. AFCA can consider an individual complaint against a particular financial firm. The class action brings common claims on behalf of eligible group members against Macquarie and seeks compensation for losses that investors say remain unpaid.

To pursue an AFCA complaint, an investor generally needs to complain to the financial firm first, identify the conduct complained of, lodge an individual complaint and provide supporting material such as statements of advice, superannuation statements and adviser communications. AFCA may help the parties reach an outcome or issue a determination requiring compensation.

The class action takes a different approach. Rather than focusing only on an individual adviser, it examines Macquarie’s alleged responsibility for making Shield available through its superannuation platform and seeks to resolve common issues for eligible group members in one court proceeding.

Not everybody who had their money invested in Shield received advice from a financial advisor – we believe that those people also should have a right to bring a claim before the Court to have their loss paid back.

Will AFCA get my money back?

AFCA requires each investor to take action for themselves. An investor must identify the appropriate financial firm, prepare and support their complaint, and remain engaged throughout the process. Some Shield investors may not know that they can complain, may be unsure which firm is responsible, or may not have the practical capacity to pursue an individual claim.

The class action relies on the power of collective action to bring a claim on behalf of the legal applicant and all eligible group members.

It also means that lead applicants and group members can have the benefit of receiving expert legal advice on their claim. In our experience, not everybody is comfortable with making a claim by themselves with AFCA, given the legal arguments and complexity that is often involved in that process, and some people prefer to have lawyers help them through that process in any event.

A successful AFCA complaint does not necessarily result in payment. We understand that many financial advice firms connected with the Shield collapse are in liquidation or may not have sufficient assets or insurance to meet determinations made against them. An investor may therefore establish that compensation is owed but still be unable to recover it from the adviser firm.

What happens if AFCA makes a favourable decision but the adviser cannot pay?

If an eligible AFCA determination remains unpaid because the financial firm is insolvent, the investor may then be able to apply to the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR). This is a further process, the investor must first obtain the AFCA determination, report that it has not been paid and receive confirmation that reasonable recovery steps have been completed.

The CSLR must separately assess the claim and take account of any other recoveries. Compensation is capped at $150,000 per claim. This means that even an eligible investor may not recover their full loss through the CSLR. In speaking to registrants we have already determined that a high number of them have losses in excess of this $150,000 cap.

CSLR funding is not reserved for Shield investors. It is used for eligible unpaid determinations arising from covered financial misconduct across Australia and is subject to statutory funding arrangements. The CSLR states that claims may take approximately 3 to 12 months to assess and may take longer where additional funding is required. The timing and amount of any payment therefore cannot be assumed.

What does the class action seek to achieve?

Gordon Legal has commenced this Class Action on behalf of eligible investors who invested in Shield through Macquarie’s superannuation platform. The claim is made against Macquarie, the superannuation platform manager, not the various financial planners who may have advised investment in Shield.

The proceeding allows common issues to be determined once for the group, including for people who have not made an AFCA complaint. It seeks compensation for losses investors say were not covered by Macquarie’s earlier payments, including the investment returns their superannuation may have earned elsewhere.

Macquarie added Shield investment options to its superannuation platform, making them available to members and enabling advisers and others to direct retirement savings into the fund. The class action alleges that Macquarie failed to conduct appropriate due diligence and oversight before doing so. These allegations have not yet been determined by the Court.

A class action can investigate and pursue common claims for the wider group through one court process, rather than requiring every affected person to complete AFCA claims and then potentially CSLR on their own. It can seek to establish responsibility against the platform trustee and other parties that may have greater capacity to meet a judgment or settlement.

A class action does not guarantee recovery, but in our experience, it can offer a broader and more practical pathway to compensation for group members. Registering for updates does not stop you from making an AFCA complaint, and any compensation already received would be taken into account because double recovery is not permitted.

This information is general only and is not legal or financial advice. Eligibility, time limits and available compensation depend on individual circumstances and may change.

You may be affected if your super was invested into the Shield Master Fund with Macquarie.

You should check your investment or super statements to see if your super was invested in the Shield Master Fund – some investors may not even be aware that their financial advisors used Macquarie’s super platform to invest their super.

If you are unsure, a good starting point is to check your super or investment statements to confirm whether you were invested into Shield via Macquarie.

You can register for updates here.

If you are unsure, please feel free to contact our team on 1300 58 46 26 to discuss.

A core feature of superannuation is your super grows in value over time. An initial relatively small amount put into your super when you are 20 years old may grow significantly by the time you retire.

Macquarie has only repaid what Shield investors originally paid into the fund. It has not compensated investors for how much their super would have grown, which means that Shield investors are millions of dollars out of pocket.