Wednesday 15th August 2018 |
Text too small? |
The High Court has ruled listed firms in voluntary administration don't need to meet NZX's continuous disclosure obligations designed to protect the integrity of trading.
Chief High Court Judge Geoff Venning found disclosure obligation don't apply for those listed issuers in voluntary administration, saying the legislation supporting the NZX's listing rules was based on the premise of an active market, which doesn't exist in an administration. Parliament's specific prohibition on share trading during an administration meant there was no need for continuous disclosure, which aims to facilitate and maintain the integrity of an operating market.
"The whole premise is that there is an active market and continuous disclosure is necessary to prevent trading without the market participants being fully informed," Justice Venning said in a judgment yesterday. "That does not arise when the issuer is in administration and trading in its shares are frozen."
The Financial Markets Authority put the question to the court, heard in the High Court in Auckland last week, to get some clarity after the collapse of insurer CBL Corp. The company had its stock suspended from the NZX in February over concerns about the information it provided on the solvency of its insurance operations. The FMA is one of several regulators investigating the company and focused on whether CBL kept the market informed of material information and met continuous disclosure obligations
The market watchdog's application was supported by NZX, which considered the listing rules continued to apply to listed firms in administration. The stock market operator didn't seek to be heard.
The FMA noted the findings and said it took the case stated procedure - which seeks the court's opinion on a point of law without taking action against a particular party - saying it was "grateful to the court for its prompt attention, both in providing a hearing date and issuing its findings". The authority thanked CBL administrator KordaMentha for its participation.
Justice Venning said the practical benefits of continuing disclosure for fund managers and investors to revalue their shareholdings weren't the interests the regime was designed to protect. Imposing those obligations on an administrator would distract them from their principal role to act in the interest of creditors.
"I consider there is force in the argument for the administrators that where a company is in administration a reasonable person would not expect information from the company to effect the price of the quoted shares, given that shares are unable to be traded," Justice Venning said. "The information may enable analysts to review the value they place on shares as opposed to the price the shares are frozen at on the market, but as noted previously that is not the purpose of continuous disclosure."
The judge said costs should fall where they lie.
(BusinessDesk)
No comments yet
POT Financial Results for the year to 30 June 2025
MOVE FY25 Results for the year ended 30 June 2025
BPG - Completion of Retail Offer
Comvita releases results for the year ended 30 June 2025
August 29th Morning Report
Air New Zealand announces 2025 financial result
August 28th Morning Report
VSL - 2025 date of Annual Meeting of shareholders
WIN - Winton announces FY25 Annual Results
Meridian Energy Limited 2025 Full Year Financial Results