Rinehart family feud over trust to go to confidential arbitration

The poisonous billion-dollar dispute between Australia’s richest woman Gina Rinehart and two of her four children has been taken out of the public spotlight and will now go to confidential arbitration.

• Gina Rinehart in family feud over $4b trust
• Gina Rinehart gives business advice to women

The latest poisonous billion-dollar dispute between Australia’s richest woman Gina Rinehart and two of her four children has been taken out of the public spotlight.

The sensational row over the family fortune and mining interests which saw bitter emails in which Ginia Rinehart, who has sided with her mother, dubbed an “oxygen thief” by her brother, will now go to confidential arbitration after a ruling on Wednesday by the High Court.

It is a win for Mrs Rinehart, 65, who has been locked in the escalating disputes with her daughter Bianca Rinehart, 40, and son John Hancock, 43.

Ginia Rinehart, left, has sided with her mother Gina Rinehart.

MORE NEWS:

Rebels members on brutal home invasion and kidnap charges

Shorten’s heartfelt tale missing vital fact

Comment: Why NRL should welcome back Israel Folau

First there was the fight over the Hope Margaret Family Trust — established by Mrs Rinehart’s father, the late mining magnate Lang Hancock, for his four grandchildren — after she changed the vesting days before the children were to come into the money.

In 2015, the NSW Supreme Court appointed Bianca Rinehart trustee of the trust in place of her mother.

Ginia, 34, and the third sister, Hope Rinehart Welker, 33, have been on the side of their Western Australia-based mother, who became chairman of the family flagship company Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd and the Hancock Group after her father died in 1992.

Mrs Rinehart has since built a fortune worth $20 billion and has been named one of the world’s most powerful women.

Meanwhile in October 2014, Bianca Rinehart and John Hancock began the current legal proceedings against their mother, alleging she wrongfully transferred valuable mining assets from a trust to another trust in which their mother had a substantial financial interest.

The siblings wanted the case heard in public but the High Court has ruled that deeds they signed in exchange for financial benefits included clauses for any disputes to be confidentially arbitrated.

Bianca Rinehart launched the legal proceedings with her brother John Hancock.

Ms Rinehart and Mr Hancock had challenged the validity of the arbitration clauses on a range of grounds including misleading and deceptive conduct and undue influence and duress.

Mrs Rinehart has not been required to file a defence to the claims and no findings have been made with respect to the claims, the High Court said.

“Each of the deeds contains an arbitral clause,” the High Court said in a majority judgment of four to one.

John Hancock and Bianca Rinehart.

Gina Rinehart and daughter Ginia.

The deeds were intended to address the risk of commercial damage to Hancock Prospecting and the Hancock Group by public statements which might be made by Mr Hancock and the risk of disclosure of confidential information, the court said.

“Confidentiality was plainly a serious concern at this point,” the court said in its judgment published today.

They referred to Mr Hancock’s use of “sensationalist media” to publicise his claims and the potential for him “to negatively seek exposure with the public or with the media” particularly during periods of negotiation, the court said.

Ms Rinehart and Mr Hancock have been ordered to pay their mother’s court costs.