X
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Events
Subscribe to our Newsletter
  • News
    • Markets
    • Regulation
    • Super
    • M&A
    • Tech
    • Appointments
  • Podcast
  • Webcasts
  • Video
  • Analysis
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
  • News
    • Markets
    • Regulation
    • Super
    • M&A
    • Tech
    • Appointments
  • Podcast
  • Webcasts
  • Video
  • Analysis
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
No Results
View All Results
Home News Markets

IOOF company to face $75m court action

A number of Australian retirees, backed by litigation funder IMF Bentham, will be taking IOOF subsidiary Australian Executor Trustees to court, providing $75 million for the case over the loss of investments in a forestry scheme from the 1980s.

by Sarah Simpkins
March 13, 2019
in Markets, News
Reading Time: 3 mins read
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

The investors’ lawyers, firm Piper Alderman, said that AET had failed in its duty as security trustee to protect the investors’ interests in the Southern Australian Perpetual Forests (Sapfor) scheme.

The supreme court of NSW has scheduled the hearing over eight days from 1 July.

X

Investors in Sapfor, known as ‘covenantholders’, were promised a safe long-term investment into land and trees in Mount Gambier’s green triangle area.

Tasmanian forestry group Gunns bought Sapfor and its parent company Auspine in a deal valued at nearly $350 million in 2008, but then struggled to pay its debts following the GFC.

Two years after acquiring Auspine, Gunns granted fixed and floating change security over all the Sapfor scheme assets to its lender ANZ as a condition for a new loan of $340 million.

AET was said to be unaware at the time.

A buyer from overseas was found for Sapfor and in March 2012, a deal was signed with Gunns agreeing to sell the trees and land for $39 million with AET consenting for the money to be paid directly to Gunns’ overdraft account on top of agreeing to release encumbrances on the Sapfor assets.

A few months later, Gunns went bust and the entirety of the scheme’s assets, totalling around $55 million, were lost to receivers appointed by ANZ.

AET is being accused of acting negligently and in breach of trust by prematurely releasing the scheme’s security arrangements before receiving sale proceeds worth $55 million.

The money, IMF said, was due to the covenantholders, but never reached the approximate 4,500 investors, with Gunns instead using it to repay its debts to bankers.

Piper Alderman partner Simon Morris described the case as “remarkably simple”, saying the bundle of rights that protected Covenantholders’ investment including them holding security over the scheme assets, which was meant to remain in place until they received the proceeds from the sale of their assets.

“The negligence is that upon the sale of the scheme assets the security trustee, AET, as advised by Sparke Helmore lawyers, inexplicably consented to the security being released without the covenantholders also receiving the proceeds from the sale of their assets,” Mr Morris said.

“The result was the covenantholders went from being secured for the full value of their investment to losing everything.

“These covenantholders have been badly let down by the professionals whose job it was to look after their commercial interests.”

The current court dispute began in 2016, when an aggrieved covenantholder, with backing from IMF Bentham, applied to the NSW Supreme Court to appoint a new trustee to investigate Sapfor’s affairs.

In July 2016, David Kerr of RSM Partners in Sydney was appointed additional trustee.

A year later, with approval from the Court, Mr Kerr commenced proceedings on behalf of the covenantholders, believed to number around 4,500 in total, to recover the $55m losses plus interest from AET.
 
Court papers show AET sought to defend the case by blaming its then lawyers, Sparke Helmore, for giving allegedly negligent advice. 

Penrith, western Sydney based Peter Hickson bought his 1983 covenant in early 1984 and he recalled paying it back over several years.

“The plan was deliberate to have a long-term investment in what I thought was a reputable company,” Mr Hickson said.

“Following the sale of 30 years of timber plus land valuation, naturally, I expected a return.”

He said his family had faced hardships in paying off the investment, with his wife becoming sick and passing away.

“These people should face the appropriate regulating body,” Mr Hickson said.

“They should be held accountable for their actions. They should have their credentials withdrawn.”

 

Related Posts

Investors urged to add ‘speedboats’ to portfolios

by Olivia Grace-Curran
December 9, 2025

Traditional portfolios are slowing investors down, according to Apostle Funds Management, which argues the next decade will belong to those...

ASIC sues another super trustee over First Guardian deficiencies

by Laura Dew
December 9, 2025

ASIC has commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court against superannuation trustee Diversa Trustees, regarding the First Guardian Master Fund.  ASIC alleges Diversa failed to conduct adequate due...

NAB strengthens JBWere with BlackRock upgrade and new CIO

by Adrian Suljanovic
December 9, 2025

NAB has expanded JBWere’s capabilities through a BlackRock partnership and appointed Alexandra Campbell as its incoming chief investment officer. NAB...

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

VIEW ALL
Promoted Content

Why U.S. middle market private credit is a powerful income solution for Australian institutional investors

In today’s investment landscape, middle market direct lending, a key segment of private credit, has emerged as an attractive option...

by Tim Warrick
December 2, 2025
Promoted Content

Is Your SMSF Missing Out on the Crypto Boom?

Digital assets are the fastest-growing investment in SMSFs. Swyftx's expert team helps you securely and compliantly add crypto to your...

by Swyftx
December 2, 2025
Promoted Content

Global dividends reach US$519 billion, what’s behind the rise?

Global dividends surged to a record US$518.7 billion in Q3 2025, up 6.2% year-on-year, with financials leading the way. The...

by Capital Group
November 18, 2025
Promoted Content

Why smaller can be smarter in private credit

Over the past 15 years, middle market direct lending has grown into one of the most dynamic areas of alternative...

by Tim Warrick, Managing Director of Principal Alternative Credit, Principal Asset Management
November 14, 2025

Join our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.

Latest Podcast

Podcast

Relative Return Insider: GDP rebounds and housing squeeze getting worse

by Staff Writer
December 5, 2025
After more than two decades, InvestorDaily continues to be an institution that connects and influences Australia’s financial services sector. This influential and integrated media brand connects with leading financial services professionals within superannuation, funds management, financial planning and intermediary distribution through a range of channels, including digital, social, research, broadcast, webcast and events.

Subscribe to our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.

About Us

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Collection Notice
  • Privacy Policy

Popular Topics

  • Markets
  • Appointments
  • Regulation
  • Super
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Tech
  • Promoted Content
  • Analysis

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited

No Results
View All Results
NEWSLETTER
  • News
  • Markets
  • Regulation
  • Super
  • M&A
  • Tech
  • Appointments
  • Podcast
  • Webcasts
  • Promoted Content
  • Events
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited