Judge slams IOOF witnesses over unsatisfactory evidence

IOOF/chief-financial-officer/chairman/director/

6 November 2003
| By Craig Phillips |

IOOFhas been denounced in a recent Supreme Court ruling after the presiding Judge considered its case plagued with “inconsistencies” and that “virtually every witness was open to criticism”.

The ruling, which IOOF is appealing in a hearing on Friday, found in favour of two advisers who alleged the Melbourne-based firm sold to Bendigo Bank in 1999, building society offices the pair had separately agreed to franchise (MM October 2, 2003).

Judge Habersberger was critical of IOOF with claims that many key documents were disclosed “belatedly” and “eventually”, leading to contradictions in some witness statements.

“I generally found all of the witnesses called on behalf of the plaintiff(s) to be honestly trying to recall past events… I cannot say the same about all of the witnesses called on behalf of the defendants,” the judge said in handing down his ruling.

“Ms Pearce [a former IOOF employee and now Bendigo Bank chief manager operations, retail] and Mr Mollison [IOOF chief financial officer], in particular were unsatisfactory witnesses. They were not forthcoming about past events, often resorting to evasive or non-responsive answers,” the Judge said.

Habersberger also commented on the evidence of chairman Raymond Shoer, who retired as a director in January 1998, but was recently re-appointed group chairman following the resignation of Charles Macek.

“I am not prepared to accept Mr Shoer’s evidence of what was and was not discussed at board meetings because his recollection was shown to be faulty.”

However, the judge did not accuse Schoer, who is the former Australian Stock Exchange national director operations, of willingly misleading the court.

“Whilst I accept that Schoer was honestly trying to give his evidence, his recollection was shown to be quite faulty when the belatedly discovered documents were examined and his evidence is therefore not reliable.”

IOOF legal counsel,Phillips Foxpartner Brad Ross, says IOOF cannot comment on the case while it is still appealing the overall ruling on liability.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 week 2 days ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 1 week ago

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

2 days 11 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

1 week 5 days ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

2 weeks 5 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo