judgement[10] re ocv , page-2

The Age report may have concealed the assessment of Deloitte's performance but the actual decision didn't.

From ASF

"Basically from my lay reading McMurdo is saying:

The boys from Deloitte wanted access to OCV cash so they could pay themselves. To get CBA to release the cash they exchanged a few letters with the ATO and Fortress.

Then Deloitte appears to have been a bit enthusiastic in interpreting their legal advice and handed ~$20M to receivers in December 08 and didn't instruct the receiver not to pass the $20M to Fortress. Fortress won't give the $20M back and Deloitte potentially could be sued by the rest of us creditors for that amount.

Deloitte have been busy getting Fortress to agree to put the $20M in an escrow account to remove Deloitte's conflict of interests. McMurdo wouldn't give the agreement his blessing. (Who paid for all that negotiation and court time? Us creditors?)

Wasn't enough and McMurdo found that Deloitte are now conflicted.

McMurdo got stuck into the question of solvency in para [34]: "But it was one thing to say that the company may have been solvent as at that date. It was another to express the opinion that it was probably solvent." "