Why would the administrator feel that. He originally thought that, but perhaps things have changed somewhat. He may have thought that with the share sale injunctions, but certainly under section 52, there is a very strong case for misleading and decpetive conduct about beneficial ownership, which may void the Opes Prime contract and certain clauses in many cases.
The court will no doubt also look at ANZ's actions as well to determine if they were in fact margin loans or share lending arrangments and the notifications of interests and takeovers cannot get exmpetion under the AMSLA, your either the benefical owner, or you are NOT. All the current arguements and actions of both Opes Prime and ANZ point to the fact that they were equitable margin loans, not share loans.
It really hard not to see plantiffs getting up on section 52 if you realied on statments from the marketing brochures and website specifically saying beneficial ownership, custodian and the very small fine print in the hard to understand agreement indicating otherwise. All the actions in the transaction indicate equitable share mortgage as well.
