Energy Resources of Australia Limited 02R

Introduction

  1. The review Panel, Jeremy Leibler, Bruce McLennan and Karen Phin (sitting President), affirmed the initial Panel’s decision to make a declaration of unacceptable circumstances in relation to the affairs of Energy Resources of Australia Limited1 and varied the initial Panel’s final orders. The review Panel was satisfied that orders prohibiting Rio Tinto from compulsorily acquiring shares in ERA as a consequence of ERA’s entitlement offer would be unfairly prejudicial to Rio Tinto and removed those orders.

Cromwell Property Group

Introduction

  1. The Panel, Richard Hunt (sitting President), Rory Moriarty and Sharon Warburton, declined to conduct proceedings on an application by Cromwell Corporation Limited and Cromwell Property Securities Limited as responsible entity for the Cromwell Diversified Property Trust in relation to the affairs of Cromwell.  The application concerned whether a number of persons were associated in relation to Cromwell and held a combined, but undisclosed, relevant interest and voting power of up to 35.85% in Cromwell, consequently leading to breaches of the substantial holder not

Smoke Alarms Holdings Limited 02R - Review Panel Decision

The review Panel has affirmed the decision of the initial Panel to make a declaration of unacceptable circumstances in Smoke Alarms Holdings Limited (Annexure A).

The review Panel has accepted undertakings from Smoke Alarms Holdings Limited (SAH), Mr Randall Deer and Fast Future Pty Ltd as trustee for Fast Future Trust (Fast Future) (Annexures B, C and D respectively).

Energy Resources of Australia Limited 02R - Review Panel Decision

The review Panel has affirmed the decision of the initial Panel to make a declaration of unacceptable circumstances in Energy Resources of Australia Limited (Annexure A) and varied the initial Panel’s orders (Annexure B).

The review Panel was satisfied that orders prohibiting Rio Tinto1 from compulsorily acquiring shares in Energy Resources of Australia Limited (ERA) as a consequence of ERA’s entitlement offer would be unfairly prejudicial to Rio Tinto and therefore removed those orders. 

Subscribe to