Sharechat Logo

Appeal court knocks back Feltex shareholder suit

Wednesday 12th October 2016

Text too small?

The Court of Appeal has dismissed former Feltex Carpets shareholder Eric Houghton's long-running suit against the promoters and directors of the failed carpet-maker, saying the only conduct that could be deemed misleading or deceptive wasn't material enough to cause loss. 

Justices Ellen France, Tony Randerson and Helen Winkelmann dismissed Houghton's appeal in the long-running representative action on behalf of 3,639 former shareholders over claimed failings in Feltex's 2004 prospectus.

Most of Houghton's grounds were knocked back by the bench, and while the forecast for earnings in the 2004 financial year gave Houghton grounds to pursue a claim that the document contained misleading statements, "given the court's finding that the forecast for FY04 was immaterial, the majority considers the contention that the forecast caused loss is untenable," the judgment said. 

Feltex investor Houghton had sued the former Feltex directors, owners and sale managers in a representative action seeking $185 million including interest for shareholders his suit said had been misled by the 2004 prospectus. Justice Robert Dobson found in favour of the defendants, while noting some criticisms of the offer documents.

Houghton was successful in convincing Justices Randerson and Winkelmann, being the majority, that the High Court erred in its definition of promoter, finding the joint lead managers First NZ Capital and Forsyth Barr should have been captured, though that's since changed under the new securities law regime which excludes the concept of promoter as those liable for misleading statements. 

"The critical commercial role they played in the offer meant they were able to shape aspects of the offer, even if they did not have decision-making power," the judgment said. 

Justice France disagreed, saying joint lead managers simply assisted with offers. 

The judges asked for submissions on costs, with a preliminary view that there wasn't a justification for an uplift. 

Houghton's litigation funders - Harbour Litigation Investment Fund and Joint Action Funding Limited - were ordered to pay costs of $3.1 million plus disbursements in the High Court case, who had indemnified the plaintiff against losing.

BusinessDesk.co.nz



  General Finance Advertising    

Comments from our readers

No comments yet

Add your comment:
Your name:
Your email:
Not displayed to the public
Comment:
Comments to Sharechat go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved. It is allowable to use some form of non-de-plume for your name, however we recommend real email addresses are used. Comments from free email addresses such as Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc may not be approved.

Related News:

Devon Funds Morning Note - 06 May 2024
EROAD FY24 Results and Webinar Details
thl reduces FY24 NPAT guidance
May 6th Morning Report
Spark New Zealand appoints new director to the Spark Board
AFT to announce full year results on May 23 2024
CRP - Korella North Takes Another Two Steps Forward
May 3rd Morning Report
ASB workers to strike as bank proposes an effective pay cut
Rising tides, sinking stocks: study explores cost of climate change