Perhaps ANZ lawyers used lawyers favourite get out of jail free card. How can you argue what a lawyer should or shouldn't know? So instead of giving their clients (bosses for inhouse lawyers) the bad news (or if they know they don't know the answer but could find it with a truck load of research) they just throw down the 'the law is unclear on that point' card.
Re your Qs:
Q:What could it mean?
A:No idea. Maybe it's ass covering. Maybe something more foul. I believe risk management features prominently in legal matters where uncertainty exists. (Whether that uncertainty is real or generated by lawyers to give them more work) So in late 2008 it was worth taking the risk because they needed to take certain actions to protect their positions? But now that forensic accountants are all over the various collapses- they need to make themselves look like good little corporate citizens? Features of our law allows them to get away with such behaviour with a small slap on the wrist?
Q: By the way I couldnt find any ASX anns...havent paid asx?. How did you find this one?
A: The wonder of Google. I do regular search. Looking for a support material for legal action aginst my financial advisor.
Q: It says their voting power hasnt changed by more than 1%, which could be an indicator of significance and what is being corrected and why..
They could have stated, it hadnt changed at all, but it has.
A: My guess is the text of the ann mirrors the law. The law probably says you have file a notice if your stock changes by more than 1% of the total stock issued.
Q: Does that leave them over 5% because the May 08 anns shows they held a total of 5.88% voting power?
A: My guess - yes.
OCV
octaviar limited
