Liquidator forced to replead fraud allegations

Sydney liquidator David Young will have his legal advisors furiously redrafting after a judge yesterday ruled he needed to replead allegations of fraud and claims for compensation he’s seeking to pursue against Sydney accountant Aaron Randell, York Street, Sydney accounting firm Emerson, Randell & Young and the directors of Galtari Pty Ltd.

INO makes no suggestion of wrongdoing in relation to the allegations, which are contained in a report to Galtari’s creditors and outlined In the matter of Galtari Pty Ltd (in liq) [2018] NSWSC 917 (19 June 2018) .

Young is currently in hospital and is then set to head overseas on leave and Justice Fabian Gleeson has given him 14 days only in which to file and serve a draft amended statement of claim. We understand his lawyers Gillis Delaney is working to meet that deadline.

At time of writing Randell had not responded to emails seeking comment about the allegations, which include a claim that records of a meeting at which a dividend was declared were contrived to appear as if they were generated a year earlier than they in fact could have been, and that by the time the dividend was actually declared Galtari was insolvent.

Randell and second defendant Brett Smith have been relying on the fact that they have been discharged from all obligations in regards to Galtari following the conclusion of personal insolvency agreements (PIAs).

“On 20 December 2013, Mr Randell entered into a personal insolvency agreement under the provisions of Pt X of the Bankruptcy Act following a resolution of his creditors on 10 December 2013 and that on 10 April 2014 a certificate was issued under s 232 of the Bankruptcy Act by the trustee of his estate certifying that all obligations created under the personal insolvency agreement were discharged on that date,” Justice Gleeson said.

Yesterday’s judgment ruled on the defendants’ application to have Young’s claim struck out. There was a substantial jurisdictional element involved too, in that Young wanted to move his action into the Federal Court while the applicant defendants wanted it to stay in the Supreme Court.

The judge struck out of much of the pleading and also ruled that Young pay the costs of the defendants. INO can’t say how he’s funding the matter.

In regards to Randell, it’s worth noting that his name has gained some unfortunate prominence in recent years after the children of the late race horse trainer Bart Cummings sued him in relation to his role as executor of Cummings’ estate. On the Emerson, Randell & Young website Randell identifies himself as a “long term member of the Taxation Institute”.

INO contacted that organisation yesterday to determine if entering into a PIA would in any way effect the member’s status but as it turns out, the Tax Institute refuses to publicly acknowledge allegations of wrongdoing by its members even when they are published in detail by a judge of the NSW Supreme Court, and, unlike ARITA, CAANZ and CPA, conceals the identities of members who’ve been found guilty of misconduct through its own disciplinary procedures, not that Randell could’ve been subject to any such conduct given the Tax Institute didn’t know about the allegations until INO called.