11.07.2015 Views

Retail Entitlement Offer - Documents Mailed to ... - AWB Limited

Retail Entitlement Offer - Documents Mailed to ... - AWB Limited

Retail Entitlement Offer - Documents Mailed to ... - AWB Limited

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Key risks (continued)Class actions and litigation•Proceedings were commenced against <strong>AWB</strong> <strong>Limited</strong> in four separate class actions and one quasi-class action in relation <strong>to</strong> <strong>AWB</strong>’s activities during the Oil-for-FoodProgramme. Three of the class actions have been dismissed, although one dismissal is under appeal. Details of these class actions are provided in <strong>AWB</strong>’s financialstatements for the half year ended 31 March 2009 and described on <strong>AWB</strong>’s corporate website: http://www.awb.com.au/inves<strong>to</strong>rs/companyanouncements/litigation/•The impact on the financial position of <strong>AWB</strong> arising directly and indirectly from these proceedings is unknown•Following the Cole Commission’s findings in November 2006 that <strong>AWB</strong> <strong>Limited</strong>, <strong>AWB</strong> (International) <strong>Limited</strong> and some of their former employees and officers mighthave breached certain laws in relation <strong>to</strong> <strong>AWB</strong>’s participation in the OFFP, the Federal government established of a joint Task Force comprising the AustralianFederal Police, Vic<strong>to</strong>ria Police and ASIC <strong>to</strong> consider possible prosecutions.•In late 2007 ASIC commenced civil proceedings in the Supreme Court of Vic<strong>to</strong>ria against 6 former <strong>AWB</strong> direc<strong>to</strong>rs or employees, alleging breaches by them of theCorporations Act in relation <strong>to</strong> <strong>AWB</strong>’s participation in the OFFP. All of those proceedings, except for those against <strong>AWB</strong>’s former managing direc<strong>to</strong>r AndrewLindberg, have been stayed by the Court in view of the possibility of criminal proceedings against the defendants. The Lindberg matter is proceeding and the trial isdue <strong>to</strong> commence on 19 Oc<strong>to</strong>ber 2009•Since August 2007, ASIC has served on <strong>AWB</strong> and its lawyers a series of Notices <strong>to</strong> Produce documents (both hard copy and electronic) concerning theparticipation of <strong>AWB</strong>L and its wholly-owned subsidiary <strong>AWB</strong> (International) <strong>Limited</strong> in the OFFP. <strong>AWB</strong> and its lawyers have produced large volumes of documents<strong>to</strong> ASIC pursuant <strong>to</strong> these Notices but (as <strong>AWB</strong> has advised ASIC) <strong>AWB</strong> has not produced documents over which it claims legal professional privilege, and hastaken proceedings against ASIC in the Federal Court of Australia seeking <strong>to</strong> protect LPP. <strong>AWB</strong> has also intervened in the Lindberg proceedings in the SupremeCourt of Vic<strong>to</strong>ria. All of these are matters of public record.•On 28 August 2009 the Australian Federal Police announced that they had discontinued their investigations in<strong>to</strong> <strong>AWB</strong>, effectively withdrawing from the Task Force.<strong>AWB</strong> does not know whether or how this will affect ASIC’s future conduct in relation <strong>to</strong> these matters•To date, no legal action has been commenced against <strong>AWB</strong> <strong>Limited</strong> or any of its subsidiaries by any of the relevant authorities in relation <strong>to</strong> the findings of the ColeCommission•The resultant impact, if any, on the financial position of <strong>AWB</strong> <strong>Limited</strong> arising directly and indirectly from these and other potential legal actions arising from the ColeCommission is unknownCounterparty risks•As part of its ongoing commercial activities, <strong>AWB</strong> enters in<strong>to</strong> contracts with various third parties. The ability of third parties <strong>to</strong> meet their commitments under sucharrangements may impact on <strong>AWB</strong>’s business and financial positionFinancial services business risks•Landmark Financial Services is a significant lender <strong>to</strong> the Australian agricultural industry with gross loans of approximately $2.3bn. The business is relatively highlylevered, albeit not inconsistent with the capital structure of other lending financial institutions. As a result of this leverage, any deterioration in the underlying loanshas a magnified impact on the equity and advances that <strong>AWB</strong> has invested in the business. <strong>AWB</strong> may be required by the lenders <strong>to</strong> LFS <strong>to</strong> contribute additionalequity should loan values deteriorate. Assisting <strong>to</strong> mitigate this exposure is the fact that LFS has a large number of loan cus<strong>to</strong>mers, loans are primarily secured bymortgages over property, and their cus<strong>to</strong>mers are spread throughout Australia and across a variety of farm-types•As a result of any future refinancing of LFS’ loan book, additional capital may be required <strong>to</strong> be contributed by <strong>AWB</strong>Not for distribution or release in the United States or <strong>to</strong> U.S. persons40 23 September 200947

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!