Aware Super threatened with legal action for refusing to reveal its reason for CBA vote

An Aware Super member may pursue legal action against the fund if it continues to block her requests for an explanation why it voted down a climate lobby group’s push-back on CBA.

An Aware Super member is considering her legal options.

An Aware Super member is considering legal action against the fund, which she says won’t adequately explain why it voted against a call for Commonwealth Bank to demonstrate how it would cease financing new or expanded fossil-fuel projects.

Retired health professional Meredith Kefford said a response to her complaint filed in November was unsatisfactory and did not detail why the $150bn fund voted against a proposal put up by climate lobby group Market Forces at CBA’s annual general meeting.

Ms Kefford said Aware Super, which formed from the combination of First State Super and VicSuper in July 2020, had failed to reveal why it believed the Market Forces proposal required CBA to cease general financing of any fossil-fuel company.

In its initial correspondence, Aware Super told Ms Kefford the fund felt Market Forces was seeking CBA to cease general financing of any fossil fuel companies.

Ms Kefford said she was disappointed with Aware Super’s responses and failure to provide its reasons for its decision.

“It’s clear that the resolution merely asks for further climate disclosures from the bank and I am concerned that Aware not only misunderstood the resolution, but also missed an opportunity to vote for a resolution in line with its own climate commitments,” she said.

Aware Super told Ms Kefford it came to that view after considering the opinions of Commonwealth Bank, its proxy adviser, Market Forces and its external fund managers.

In response to Ms Kefford’s legal letter, Aware Super said it would not provide information or documentation disclosing how it came to that view.

In writing to Ms Kefford, Aware Super legal and company secretariat group executive Ian Pendleton said the reasons for Aware’s decision, if disclosed, would reveal confidential information.

Ms Kefford’s legal representatives, Equity Generation Lawyers, wrote back to Mr Pendleton saying that its client might take legal action.

“Our client accepts that some of the documents associated with this process may fall under the exceptions,” the legal firm wrote.

“However, Aware bears the evidentiary burden in relation to any such claims. If no response to our client’s request is received, or if the response is deemed inadequate to resolve the issues raised in this letter and our letter of November 16, 2022, our client reserves her right to commence proceedings.”

Equity Generation Lawyers lawyer Clare Schuster said her client was dissatisfied with Aware Super’s responses, but the fund “now has another chance to explain its position”.

Ms Schuster said if her client was unable to secure explanations from Aware Super, she could look at “legal avenues, including before the Federal Court of Australia”.

Market Forces last week accused five super funds of failing to use their voting power to push big polluters to set tougher emissions targets.

Market Forces said Aware Super – which was contacted for comment – was one of the funds on notice, but noted it had done the most of all the identified superannuation trustees.

Originally published as Aware Super threatened with legal action for refusing to reveal its reason for CBA vote