This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Equititrust?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to new
https://www.businessnewsaus.com.au/articles/tucker---cowen-partners-scoop-awards-pool.html

TUCKER & COWEN PARTNERS SCOOP AWARDS POOL
Written on the 28 April 2015


TUCKER & Cowen has blitzed the latest Doyle's Guide rankings, with three partners being singled out.

Richard Cowen, David Tucker (pictured left) and David Schwarz have bolstered the Adelaide Street firm's Tier 1 ranking for Insolvency.

Founding partner Tucker says the appraisal reaffirms his team is on the right track, and adds to other recommendation the firm has earned for its Litigation practice.

"We are all honoured to receive these awards which reaffirm the respected reputation we have built as the preeminent boutique firm for litigation and insolvency in Queensland," says Tucker.

"When Justin Marschke joined us his success had already been recognised by repeated rankings as 'an outstanding litigation lawyer' in the Asia Pacific Legal 500, AFR Best Lawyers and Doyle's Guide.

"Justin has again been ranked as one of Australia's Best Lawyers for litigation by Best Lawyers® International 2016 as published in the Australian Financial Review on 10 April 2015 as he has been since 2012."

"Working together we have achieved even more success in big ticket litigation and high profile insolvencies recognised throughout the world by clients and peers alike."

Tucker & Cowen's clients include Linfox, Sandvik, Vale, Armaguard, Press Metal Aluminium, Vita Group Limited, a number of other public companies and some of the country's top insolvency practitioners.

The practice's insolvency matters that have contributed to this recognition include LM Investment Management, Equititrust and Robins Kitchens, as well as some of the largest commercial litigation currently before the Courts in Australia concerning everything from coal seam gas assets, petroleum tenements, coal mining royalties and the 2011 Queensland floods to international conflicts of laws defences.

Tucker & Cowen is currently acting for Management Investments Limited & ORS on an ongoing case against the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). The firm anticipates the judgement, expected this year, will have far-reaching implications concerning unsettled law about what conditions are relevant in the situation of Responsible Entity.
 
Yes, that was 2015... How times have changed.... I don’t think David Whyte from BDO will go anywhere near Tucker & Cowan Solicitors in regard to any matter concerning Equititrust even though David Whyte and David Tucker are besties on Facebook...
 
Why was Tucker & Cowan allowed to continue representing Equititrust receiver David Whyte given the clear conflict of interest which was compounded by the fact that the EPF debt was being surreptitiously bought by Tucker and Kennedy?

At the same time Tucker & Cowan were representing the receiver David Whyte, Tucker and Cowan were representing MS Asia and Worrells who were the fronts for Tucker and Kennedy’s beneficial interest in MS Asia which bought the EPF debt. What parallel universe are we living in where this type of conflict is allowed and further legal is work pushed towards Tucker and Cowan. The fact that Tucker & Cowan claimed to have been owed hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees by Equititrust should have disqualified them immediately...
 
Yet off we trot down the path of allegedly impartial court appointed receivers giving work to solicitors intertwined in the whole saga.

To make matters worse Tucker & Cowan solicitors tried to appoint their own receivers to Equititrust before ASIC stepped in and identified that Tucker may have a conflict of interest and the court appointed receivers. Tucker & Cowan then went on to Bankrupt McIvor and appointed “Worrells” the firm with no morals as the bankruptcy trustee. The “court appointed” receiver then thought it passed the pub test to give Tucker & Cowan extensive and confidential legal work related to Equititrust and even had discussions with them in relation to the MS Asia / EPF Debt in Tucker & Cowans “role” representing them and the EPF Receiver “Worrells” ....

If this whole saga didn’t have the stench of a “nutty turd” then I don’t know what did... How on earth has this been allowed to play out at the expense of investors and legitimate creditors of Equititrust and its funds ???
 

Mozzi having trouble posting this past few days. - Has anyone read The Age Melb. Fri 27th Sept front page re Banksia fees row? No Trust mentions above "court appointed" receiver and it talks about, among other things a "court appointed "contradictor" ! Would like to know what this position is, and what teeth they have to follow anything through. This person it is stated investigated fees and issues which should be approved .........etc. Banksia case appears to have so many similarities to Equititrust. Any thoughts on this?
 
Hi Mozzi, great spotting and very pertinent to the Equititrust saga on a number of fronts.

In terms of Tucker & Cowan undertaking work for the court appointed receiver despite the multiple issues of conflict raises many questions.
The fact that David Whyte and his wife are Facebook friends with the Tucker’s does not really give a great impression does it.

In terms of transparency the quantum of legal fees charged by Tucker & Cowan in acting in a clear position of conflict representing the court appointed receivers is concerning and clearly needs review.

I cannot recall David Whyte getting a court sanction to have Tucker & Cowan act as solicitors given the previous conflicts outlined to the court by ASIC solicitors. Given that the court appointed BDO, this highly contentious appointment of solicitors should have had court approval too.

Maybe the Liquidators Hall Chadwick should appoint a court ordered “Contradictor” in relation to the legal fees charged by Tucker & Cowan in respect to the EIF...

It’s in all the investors interests to do so, especially given the revelations about the purchase of the BANK OF SCOTLAND debt by Tucker and Kennedy through secret squirrel corporate entity MS Asia, who Tucker & Cowan “also acted for”

I suggest a motion be put forward by investors at the next creditors meeting that both the receivers BDO and Tucker & Cowan’s fees be formally investigated by a court appointed “Contradictor”...
 
BDO should not be paid another cent in renumeration until a court appointed “Contradictor” represents the interests of the investors and creditors of the EIF.

The Contradictor needs to investigate the quantum of legal fees paid to Tucker & Cowan by BDO as well as the overlap of fees in the “discussions” relating to the EPF debt priority etc.

It is no excuse that Tucker & Cowan had started the proceedings... They had a CONFLICT OF INTEREST plain and simple and competitive quotes from at least 3 other law firms should have been obtained by BDO.

The fact that Tucker & Cowan claimed to have been owed over $500,000 by Equititrust should have disqualified them immediately in terms of preconceived bias against the company and additionally against McIvor... Yet in their wisdom BDO just ploughed the legal work Tucker & Cowan’s way... How can this be considered to be in the investors best interests.

ITS TIME FOR AN INVESTIGATION... NO MORE FEES FOR BDO...
 
Here’s one for McIvor... Lawyers on boards with a conflict of interest are NOT a good idea... McIvor at one deluded point thought Tucker was a good idea... That panned out well
 
No Trust said:
Here’s one for McIvor... Lawyers on boards with a conflict of interest are NOT a good idea... McIvor at one deluded point thought Tucker was a good idea... That panned out well View attachment 97823
Click to expand...


Turns out that lawyers are not crash hot on boards with or without conflict of interest, or in fact running their own companies either.
They mostly seem to be excellent at self interest. Oh my goodness, is that too cynical?
 
My oh my, just reading this judgement on a flight and I’m totally gobsmacked... Tucker & Cowan were eviscerated by Justice Bowskill in his judgment.

Tucker & Cowan’s usual tactic of incurring expenses on the other side through multiple interlocutory hearings just blew up in their faces...


https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QSC/2019/248
 
More updates on this breaking judgement tomorrow when I land, but it’s safe to say that this judgement is a total disaster for Tucker & Cowan going forward to trial...

 
Last edited:
If the veracity of the allegations are proven at trial, what chance did the investors of the Equititrust Premium Income Fund have ???
 
Justice Bowskill has produced an excellent judgment which lays bare the obfuscation of Tucker & Cowan solicitors in delaying the matter with inane interlocutory applications, incurring huge cost on the liquidators without filing any defence.

The audacity of Tucker & Cowan to try and have the matters struck out and summary judgement awarded to them without a defence or Notice of Intention to Defend being filed in over a year since the matter was filed is outrageous.

The judgement by Bowskill J has shone a spotlight on the usual modus operandi of Tucker & Cowan solicitors in using Interlocutory applications to consume time and place huge expense on the other side hoping they will fold...

Finally the justice system in Queensland has exposed and penalised them, with a cost order awarded against them in relation to the striking out and summary judgement applications which will be substantial given the 2 day trial.
 
Meanwhile, whilst MS Asia was financially raping and pillaging the Equititrust Premium Fund with wanton abandon, the Liquidators alleging in court filings that BOSI bank statements were being altered after the fact increasing the debt - The receivers of the Equititrust Income Fund, BDO were ploughing litigation and recovery work Tucker & Cowan’s way.

This was a monumental CONFLICT OF INTEREST and BDO knew the contentious and controversial prior roles of Tucker and Kennedy at Equititrust. ASIC intervened in court proceedings where Tucker was trying to appoint his own receivers to Equititrust and applied to have an “independent court appointed receiver”...

Friday’s judgement by Bowskill J should OUTRAGE investors of the Equititrust Income Fund.

A court appointed “Contradictor” representing the “unrepresented interests” of EIF investors and creditors needs to be appointed by the court to investigate the conflict of interest in BDO giving swathes of legal work to Tucker & Cowan and to look into any consultancy payments made to David Kennedy as a result of meetings with him as listed in the billing sheets of BDO.

The “Court Appointed Contradictor” needs to :

1) Independently examine the billing of BDO as it relates to meetings with Tucker & Cowan representing MS Asia.

2) Have Independent experts review the quantum of billing by Tucker & Cowan in relation to the work given to them by BDO relating to the EIF which was clearly a conflict of interest.

3) Apply to have independent forensic experts review the BDO and Tucker & Cowan billing and seek directions from the court for compensation for any billing amounts which are found to be not in accordance with the law.

It’s clear from the judgement of Justice Bowskill that there are serious allegations of self interests being served and multiple allegations of self dealing.

For BDO to have the temerity to tell the Courier Mail that giving work to Tucker & Cowan Solicitors was in the best interests of investors, is the antithesis of what was in the best interests of investors as is played out in the factual matrix of allegations outlined by Bowskill J in pushing the matter to a full trial.






 
Why is it alleged that Worrells’ the “firm with no morals” aka MS Asia’s friendly receiver had $500,000 transferred to its general trust account from the Tucker & Cowan general trust account ???

Refer to page 16 para 32




Further at para 34 it is alleged by the Liquidators that both Tucker and Cowan are personally liable to restore to Equititrust $16,621,064 and the new incorporated firm TCSS $58,658.00 as a result of monies paid out to parties who the Liquidators allege were not the rightful beneficiaries of the funds.

The EPF investors who have passed away in the interim must be turning in their graves as a result of the revelations detailed in Justice Bowskill’s judgement.
 
Given the allegations detailed in the judgment, the future of professional indemnity insurance for Tucker & Cowan surely must be a serious matter...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...