Future of case against Queensland Nickel in dispute
Lawyers acting for Clive Palmer’s companies have raised doubts about the future of the Queensland Nickel liquidation trial.
Lawyers acting for Clive Palmer’s companies have raised doubts about the future of the Queensland Nickel liquidation trial, saying the liquidators still pursuing millions of dollars for creditors have no case.
The trial was scheduled to continue in the Supreme Court in Brisbane today after Mr Palmer and the special purpose liquidators reached a settlement agreement, believed to be worth about $100 million, on Monday.
The general purpose liquidators, seeking to recoup money from Mr Palmer’s flagship company Mineralogy for remaining unsecured creditors, put together a “draft amended statement of claim”, which was forwarded to the defendants this morning.
Barrister Graham Gibson, representing the for the GPL said the case could continue with evidence being presented tomorrow.
But lawyers for Mr Palmer’s companies sought an adjournment, flagging an application to stay the entire proceeding, and disagreeing with the GPL about the scope of the issues that remain in the case.
Barrister Chris Ward, representing Mr Palmer’s companies, said his clients had issues with the GPL’s draft amended statement of claim.
“There is the most serious dispute between us, which we are still coming to grips with in relation to what is left in this trial,” Mr Ward said.
“Mr Palmer, we’ve learned this morning, appears to be nominated as a named defendant, for what reason we know not because there should be nothing left in litigation against Mr Palmer.”
Mr Gibson argued the settlement between the special purpose liquidator and Mr Palmer did not affect the case being run by the general purpose liquidator.
“If it’s contended that the terms of settlement between the SPL and the defendants would impact on the GPL then that’s going to be a matter of argument, rather than discussion,” he said.
Mr Ward said the GPL was “operating under a misapprehension” about the terms of Monday’s settlement and what it meant for the issues left to be explored in the case.
“What has occurred is a deed of settlement which also involves Queensland Nickel,” Mr Ward said.
“We have been released from claims by Queensland Nickel and the Special Purpose Liquidator and what is left are narrowly defined claims.
But Mr Ward said the draft statement of claim asserted that the allegation that Mr palmer was a shadow director of Queensland Nickel remained part of the GPL case.
“The shadow director allegation appears to still be made, despite being expressly withdrawn by Queensland Nickel and the SPLs,” he said.
“There will be serious debate about these matters.
“I will undertake to inform Mr Palmer about these matters.”
Mr Ward said there were “no creditors of Queensland Nickel left relevant to the proceedings” and accused the GPL of continuing the case so that it could recoup their fees.
The GPL has been bankrolled by Vannin Capital.
Mr Ward said the defendants would be making an application to discontinue the trial.
The case will be adjourned until August 19, when Justice Debra Mullins will hear arguments from both sides about the way the trial should proceed and the relevant issues in it.