‘Dishonest and fraudulent' scheme: Bankrupt property developers ordered to repay $66m
Federal Court Justice Ian Jackman said that the trio had breached sections of the Corporations Act, which stipulates that directors must act in the company's best interest.
In this case, their company, Special Gold, purchased a property on Argyle Street, Parramatta, for $2.6 million in 1998 and sold it for $73.97 million in late 2020.
On December 17, 2020, the Supreme Court imposed a freezing order preventing Special Gold from dealing with the proceeds of the sale.
On the same day, Special Gold's directors Sam and Fayad-Lee opened a bank account with the State Bank of India (SBI). Five days later, $34 million from the property sale was deposited into the newly opened SBI account.
Millions of dollars then flowed from the SBI account to pay for other dealings that the Fayads had on the boil. None of these transactions appeared to be of any benefit to Special Gold and had been prohibited only the previous week by the freezing orders, the judge found.
For example, on December 23, $13.25 million went from the SBI account to Remon Fayad's company to purchase shares in another company.
'The payments by Special Gold for those share purchases … constituted a dishonest and fraudulent design on the part of Sam and Fayad-Lee, to the knowledge of Remon,' said Jackman in his judgment delivered on Tuesday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7NEWS
a day ago
- 7NEWS
Huge win for Australian women embroiled in Qatar Airways physical examination horror as Federal Court rules they can sue airline
There were tears in court on Thursday as a group of Australian women had a stunning legal victory after being dragged off a plane and strip searched in the Middle East. The five Australians were among hundreds of women alleged to have been forcibly removed from aircraft at Doha on October 2, 2020 as officials searched for the mother of a newborn found in a bathroom at the terminal. On Thursday, the group of five women won the right to sue Qatar Airways over the airline conducting intimate physical examinations on the tarmac without their consent. Taken off planes by armed guards, many allege they were forced to conduct non-consensual gynaecological or intimate physical examinations. One of the victims Anna, who was searched in an ambulance on the tarmac of Hamad International Airport in Doha, Qatar, sat down with 7NEWS. 'The fear, the anxiety, the tears. I can't even describe it in words, these moments, really,' Anna said. 'It still comes in waves.' She was officially diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder this year and has flashbacks of her baby boy lying on her chest as airport staff violated her. 'Being there alone and feeling so powerless to protect not only myself, but him, mostly him,' she said. Last year, the Federal Court dismissed the women's claim against Qatar Airways, citing laws governing global travel, arguing the women weren't 'technically' injured. 'That was very, very painful. We haven't been even given the chance to be heard,' Anna said. The women, three of whom were allegedly subjected to invasive searches, had earlier launched legal action against Qatar Airways, the airport operator and the government-owned Qatar Civil Aviation Authority. After an initial ruling barred them from pursuing the airline and the QCAA, the Federal Court ruled on Thursday that the suit against Qatar Airways and the airport operator could continue. 'I was an emotional wreck. We all were,' Anna said. The women's lawyer Damian Sturzaker said his clients were relieved with their win after 'a very long and stressful struggle to bring this to court'. 'Unfortunately the case against the state of Qatar was unsuccessful, however this has always been an issue against the airline,' he said outside court. 'We've now got an opportunity to have a full hearing with all of (the women's) evidence coming out and, in those circumstances, we're very very pleased with the outcome today.' The women are seeking compensation for mental stress, for alleged assault and for the alleged false imprisonment during the airport incident nearly five years ago. They claim the airline and the airport operator were negligent and breached their duty of care to passengers who were forced off the plane and subjected to searches. A judge previously dismissed the women's claims against Qatar Airways as having no prospect of success because the searches didn't occur when disembarking or embarking the plane. However, the Full Court determined on Thursday there was 'no sufficiently high degree of certainty' that was the case and ruled it is an issue that should be decided at trial. Chief Justice Debra Mortimer, Justice Angus Stewart, Justice Stephen Stellios upheld the primary ruling that the women could not sue the QCAA because it has immunity as an entity of a foreign state. Qatar Airways was ordered to pay the legal bill accrued by the women during the appeal. The court battle between the two parties is not expected to be heard this year. Outside court, Mr Sturzaker said he was confident in his steadfast clients' case against the airline and the airport operator. 'They always would have liked to see a resolution to the matter but if that can't be achieved then of course the matter will go to hearing,' he said.
West Australian
2 days ago
- West Australian
Qatar Airways: Australian women granted right to sue airline for invasive searches at Hamad Airport
Five Australian women who were subjected to invasive internal examinations at Doha's Hamad International Airport after being forcibly removed from a Qatar Airways flight have secured the right to pursue legal action against the airline following an important Federal Court appeal victory. The women experienced the ordeal in October 2020, when airport police ordered dozens of female passengers off the aircraft for internal checks after a newborn baby was found abandoned in a bin at the airport. Shocked and distressed by the experience and the lack of an apology from Qatar Airways, the women are taking legal action against the airline, the airport operator MATAR, and Qatar's Civil Aviation Authority. In April 2024, Justice John Halley ruled the women's claim could not proceed under the Montreal Convention, reasoning that the invasive examinations did not occur during embarking or disembarking the plane. The women, represented by Marque Lawyers, appealed, arguing the searches took place as part of the disembarking process and that airline staff were aware. On Thursday, the Federal Court overturned the initial dismissal, with Justice Angus Stewart stating, 'There is no sufficiently high degree of certainty that what happened to the (women) in the ambulance could not ultimately be found to have been in 'the course of any operations of embarking or disembarking'... That issue can only be decided at trial and not on a summary basis.' The court also ruled that the women could pursue claims against MATAR for the conduct of those who performed the examinations. Justice Stewart noted, 'It cannot be concluded with sufficient confidence at this stage that the appellants (women) have or will have no basis to plead that the 'nurse' was an employee or a true agent of MATAR. It is also an error to conclude that MATAR's duty of care cannot possibly extend to the circumstances in and around the ambulance.' The appeal against Qatar's Civil Aviation Authority, however, was dismissed. The court ordered Qatar Airways and MATAR to pay the appeal costs, and the case will now return to the Federal Court for trial. 'The Full Court has set aside the orders of the primary judge summarily dismissing the claims against Qatar Airways and giving strike out relief in favour of MATAR. It has also granted liberty to the (women) to apply to file amended pleadings and ordered Qatar Airways and MATAR to pay the costs of the appeal. As regards QCAA, the Full Court has dismissed the appeal with costs,' Justice Stewart concluded. Marque Lawyers partner Damian Sturzaker said, 'Our clients endured a traumatic experience on that night in Doha and they deserve to have their day in court and compensation for their suffering.' 'They have shown enormous courage in standing up for what they believe is right and we will continue to support them as the case continues to the Federal Court,' he added. In 2023, Transport Minister Catherine King blocked Qatar Airways' application for increased flights into Australia, partly citing this case. The airline denies any wrongdoing, maintaining it cannot be held responsible for actions taken by airport police. If you or someone you know needs help, contact 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732). Lifeline: 13 11 14.
Perth Now
2 days ago
- Perth Now
Major win for women over invasive searches in Qatar airport
Five Australian women who were subjected to invasive internal examinations at Doha's Hamad International Airport after being forcibly removed from a Qatar Airways flight have secured the right to pursue legal action against the airline following an important Federal Court appeal victory. The women experienced the ordeal in October 2020, when airport police ordered dozens of female passengers off the aircraft for internal checks after a newborn baby was found abandoned in a bin at the airport. Shocked and distressed by the experience and the lack of an apology from Qatar Airways, the women are taking legal action against the airline, the airport operator MATAR, and Qatar's Civil Aviation Authority. In April 2024, Justice John Halley ruled the women's claim could not proceed under the Montreal Convention, reasoning that the invasive examinations did not occur during embarking or disembarking the plane. The women, represented by Marque Lawyers, appealed, arguing the searches took place as part of the disembarking process and that airline staff were aware. On Thursday, the Federal Court overturned the initial dismissal, with Justice Angus Stewart stating, 'There is no sufficiently high degree of certainty that what happened to the (women) in the ambulance could not ultimately be found to have been in 'the course of any operations of embarking or disembarking'... That issue can only be decided at trial and not on a summary basis.' Doha's Hamad International Airport. Credit: Stephen Scourfield / The West Australian The court also ruled that the women could pursue claims against MATAR for the conduct of those who performed the examinations. Justice Stewart noted, 'It cannot be concluded with sufficient confidence at this stage that the appellants (women) have or will have no basis to plead that the 'nurse' was an employee or a true agent of MATAR. It is also an error to conclude that MATAR's duty of care cannot possibly extend to the circumstances in and around the ambulance.' The central hall at Hamad International Airport, Doha. Credit: Stephen Scourfield / The West Australian The appeal against Qatar's Civil Aviation Authority, however, was dismissed. The court ordered Qatar Airways and MATAR to pay the appeal costs, and the case will now return to the Federal Court for trial. 'The Full Court has set aside the orders of the primary judge summarily dismissing the claims against Qatar Airways and giving strike out relief in favour of MATAR. It has also granted liberty to the (women) to apply to file amended pleadings and ordered Qatar Airways and MATAR to pay the costs of the appeal. As regards QCAA, the Full Court has dismissed the appeal with costs,' Justice Stewart concluded. Marque Lawyers partner Damian Sturzaker said, 'Our clients endured a traumatic experience on that night in Doha and they deserve to have their day in court and compensation for their suffering.' 'They have shown enormous courage in standing up for what they believe is right and we will continue to support them as the case continues to the Federal Court,' he added. In 2023, Transport Minister Catherine King blocked Qatar Airways' application for increased flights into Australia, partly citing this case. The airline denies any wrongdoing, maintaining it cannot be held responsible for actions taken by airport police. If you or someone you know needs help, contact 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732). Lifeline: 13 11 14.
