I believe in the Opes Prime position, ANZ should not have been acting as custodian as well as the back to back borrower of securities from Opes Prime. This was a major conflict of interest and very msileading to the clients of Opes Prime. If a proper custodian was used, they could have held the current Opes Prime shares due to the defult to determine the outcome and defult. ANZ acting as custodian and pricipal borrower of the pooled transation was a huge conflict and of course very misleading and gave them immediate rights to the shares.
It is wriiten very clearly in the International Share Lending Agreement that the agent (Opes Prime) had a major disclosure obilgation to ensure that the lenders of the shares are notified VERY CLEARLY that the "beneficial ownership" of the shares will be LOST and so will the voting rights. Looks like Opes Prime not only did not disclose that point very clearly, but they actually indicated the exact opposite.
