"Don't forget that ANZ will be getting media and public relations advice, not just legal. We need to accept how the media have been playing the story, and what the clients of ANZ PI etc will think if they are being railroaded into something they do not like."
So, trial by media, is what you are effectively saying.
I don't think so.
In reality, this transaction - and the circumstances surrounding it - is a legal minefield and all parties will make sure they are extremely well-advised.
For ANZ to now stand up and say, "Actually, we won't allow this to proceed because there are some individuals within IOOF for whom we don't particularly care [*]," opens them up for all kinds of legal implications.
No, if ANZ wanted to scupper the deal, there are a host of other reasons - far less legally contentious reasons - that they could draw on, instead of using specific individuals at IOOF as the reason for breaking a commercial agreement.
[*] Which I strongly sense is what any court would deem them to be effectively saying given the sub judice status of IOOF's CEO and Chair.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)