Sally Zou $414,000 cherry debt case settled confidentially
A COURT case against wealthy political donor Sally Zou over a $414,000 cherry debt has been settled.
- Sally Zou’s company faces being wound up
- Ms Zou could have to take the stand
- Explosive claims in cherry case
- Who is Sally Zou?
A COURT case against wealthy political donor Sally Zou over a $414,000 cherry debt has been settled.
In a brief mention this morning, the Supreme Court case, in which the state’s largest cherry grower Torrens Valley Orchards was pursuing Ms Zou for non-payment of $414,000, came to a close, with a confidential settlement.
“The parties have resolved their dispute amicably,’’ a joint statement reads.
“It is unfortunate that this matter was unable to be resolved without court proceedings.
“However, they retain mutual respect and put this matter behind them and hope to have the opportunity to market South Australian produce in China and South East Asia.’’
Torrens Valley was attempting to have Ms Zou’s company, Aus Food Alliance, wound up for not paying for 32 tonnes of cherries.
Ms Zou’s lawyers argued that the produce was not of saleable quality however the specific argument over this matter was not made in court.
During court hearings, which started in July, Brendon Roberts SC, for Torrens Valley, argued that initial financial documents lodged with the court in a bid to prove the company’s solvency were “fanciful’’.
“We think that the prospect of this actually being true is extremely slim,’’ he told the Court at the time.
He was also not convinced by a follow up report lodged with the court last month and wanted to cross examine Ms Zou over issues including whether one of two signatures, both of which were purported to have been hers, were indeed so.
“My submission will be that one or other is a forgery,’’ he said.
Ms Zou’s lawyer, Simon Ower said at that hearing there were “extraordinary allegations of forgery’’ being put forward by Mr Roberts. Mr Roberts clarified that he wasn’t arguing that Ms Zou had forged anything, but that one of the signatures might be a forgery.
Mr Ower also argued that the case was an “abuse of process” designed to “have her affairs exposed in the media’’.
He also accused Mr Roberts of “grandstanding’’ for the sake of the media.
Judge Graham Dart pointed out that the South Australian court system is not conducted in secret.
“We have free and open courts. There’s no reason why a solicitor can’t speak to the media,” Judge Dart said.
“The media attend this application every time. What is the problem?’’
The abuse of process argument was withdrawn at the subsequent hearing.
No details of the settlement were released.
Ms Zou has been the state Liberal Party’s largest donor in recent years.
cameron.england@news.com.au