special leave on limited grounds, page-9

Jadel

I agree with you about ASIC's aim and the importance of that aim. And I would like to think that ASIC will try to reverse some of the wrongs in the PIF/ARL case.

Sadly, as we have seen many times, ASIC's aim is NOT specifically to help PIF unit holders or ARL shareholders.

1. In the judgement of 28th May the Judges make a specific reference to reversing the in-specie distribution of ARL shares.

"ASIC does not seek to impugn the transaction by which 41% of the assets of the Fund were transferred to ARL in return for the issue of shares in that company. It had sought to do so in its originating process but did not pursue that claim in its amended pleading. It now seeks purely declaratory relief."

('Impugn' definition - to throw doubt or question the truth or validity or something, ie to reverse the transaction)

2. If there were any doubt about this ARL would be holding an 'information meeting for PIF unit holders' rather than an official Annual General Meeting with all registered shareholders of ARL legally allowed to attend and vote.

3. To reverse such a transaction years after it occurred would make a stunning legal minefield. I understand that there have been hundreds of transactions in ARL shares since the distribution and many transactions in PIF units....... ...would all these be cancelled as well?

I'm sorry to sound difficult on this, but there is clearly very little doubt about the situation. The High Court Case will have no effect on the in-specie distribution of ARL shares by PIF.

.....there will be nothing left to reverse anyway, if the directors of ARL continue with the current strategy!