Mark Hotchin loses appeal

Last updated 15:00 15/08/2014
One of the owners of failed Hanover Finance, Mark Hotchin
Fairfax NZ
Mark Hotchin.

Relevant offers

Industries

Health and safety leader David Wright says NZ on right path to safer workplaces Kathmandu admits chucking stock in dumpster but says it was faulty Fashion label Federation's resurrection a cautionary tale for importers Air New Zealand trialing robots to check for aircraft damage Govt thinks about compulsory warranty to protect against building flaws Stewart Island crib and Remarkables ski base in southern architectural awards Fairfax, NZME media merger approval sought Airways to charge less for air traffic control services Tuakau man's text-message dismissal ruled unjustified Wellington brewery Panhead Custom Ales sold to Lion Group

Former Hanover boss Mark Hotchin has lost an appeal to make Hanover's trustees liable if he and other directors and promoters of the finance company lose a suit brought by the Financial Markets Authority.

Hotchin brought the action last year, which would have seen New Zealand Guardian Trust and Perpetual Trust brought into the FMA suit as defendants and made jointly liable for any compensation awards, but the High Court struck out the application.

The Court of Appeal this afternoon released its judgment on Hotchin's appeal.

"The directors' duty was to ensure that the Hanover companies complied with the trust deeds; the trustees' duty was to monitor compliance," the judgment said.

"The nature and extent of their liabilities was different. Mr Hotchin's claim for equitable contribution is unarguable."

The FMA is pursuing civil action against the directors and promoters of Hanover and two related companies aimed at recovering some of their investors' lost millions.

The Hanover group failed in July 2008, owing 13,000 investors $554 million.

The case is set down for a 12-week hearing beginning in July next year.

The FMA alleges that during 2007 and 2008 the companies issued prospectuses, advertisements and directors' certificates containing untrue statements.

These included a failure to provide relevant information showing the companies' liquidity position had deteriorated, false claims that the companies had adopted various prudential management techniques and a failure to disclose various related-party transactions.

The authority is seeking penalties and compensation for people who relied on these statements and invested $35m in the Hanover companies.

Hotchin and other defendants have indicated their vigorous opposition to the FMA's claim.

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content