Arguments against Forrest “embarrassing”: High Court

Normal
0

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

The High Court has labeled some ASIC arguments against Andrew Forrest as "embarrassing" in the lead up to a judgment on whether the he mislead investors in 2004.

According to AAP Forrest attended proceedings on Friday, the first time he has set foot in court since the six year battle begun.

AAP reports a ruling on the case is due next month, and follows the corporate watchdog’s successful 2009 appeal against a Federal Court ruling absolving Forrest.

The case concerns statements made by Forrest in 2004 which ASIC claims misrepresented agreements Fortescue Metals Group had with three Chinese companies.

Lawyers for ASIC contend Forrest had no basis for public statements indicating the Chinese companies had agreed to finance a rail and port project in the Pilbara.

But the FMG team is arguing Forrest had a genuine and reasonable belief the framework agreements made between the two parties were legally binding.

According to ASIC investors in FMG were mislead and it was not made clear to them certain aspects of the deal were yet to be finalised.

While the 2004 framework agreements saw a spike in FMG’s share price the deal never eventuated.

Forrest is currently the chairman of FMG but if he loses the case he could be banned from acting as a director on any company.

FMG will also face million dollar fines if found guilty.

Image: ABC News

To keep up to date with Australian Mining, subscribe to our free email newsletters delivered straight to your inbox. Click here.