The legal stoush between Norwegian fertiliser giant Yara and Burrup Holdings over access to the Pankaj Oswal-controlled ammonia producer's accounts remains unresolved after a short hearing in the Federal Court today.
The legal stoush between Norwegian fertiliser giant Yara and Burrup Holdings over access to the Pankaj Oswal-controlled ammonia producer's accounts remains unresolved after a short hearing in the Federal Court today.
Yara's application for access was partially successful, with Justice Michael Barker ruling it was proper that Yara's auditor be granted access to some of Burrup's financial information and accounts.
However, Justice Barker did not grant unfettered inspection rights to Yara, and the parties are now awaiting orders on what information Yara will be entitled to access and when the inspection can commence.
Another hearing is scheduled for tomorrow, while Burrup has also been asked to provide submissions by Monday afternoon in support of its request for various documents lodged with the court to be kept confidential.
Yara launched its action last week after claiming it had been unable to access the accounts of Burrup, of which it owns 35 per cent. Yara said it wanted access to the accounts, now four months overdue, because of its concerns over Burrup's financial dealings.
Its concerns included allegations involving millions of dollars in unauthorised related party transactions and differential dividend payments.
As reported by WA Business News last week, Yara used the court to raise concerns about the differential timing of dividend payments to Mr Oswal and Yara, and a $22 million unauthorised related party payment.
In his judgement today, Justice Barker said documents tendered in the court showed Yara had a "reasonably held" concern that the $22 million appeared to have been paid by Burrup to Mr Oswal "in apparent satisfaction of certain ... obligations owed by him to the ANZ Bank".
Justice Barker also noted that Burrup's solicitors had themselves recommended "an urgent, impartial and independent investigation" into the payment.
In court last week, Yara said the sum appeared to be a "prepayment" owed on a $US350 million bank facility, known as the PLAS facility, for which Burrup did not appear to be liable.
Yara also raised concerns about payments to shipping company Maruti Shipping.
Yara Australia spokesman Asle Skredderberget welcomed the judge's ruling today as a vindication of Yara's concerns, ruling they were properly held in good faith and justified an order of inspection.
"Burrup has yet to provide an adequate explanation as to these matters and Yara now looks forward to shining some light on Burrup's books," Mr Skredderberget said.
He said the company was disappointed it had needed to resort to court action to be able to undertake an inspection.
Burrup also welcomed today's ruling, saying Yara had been wasting all parties' time and resources in taking the matter to court in the first place.
Burrup has consistently argued the court action was unnecessary because it had already given a written offer of access to the accounts subject to defined confidentiality arrangements.
It has also attacked Yara's court action as "a cynical attempt to muddy the waters" in relation to a commercial dispute between the parties over the pricing of ammonia exports from Burrup's ammonia plant near Karratha.
In a statement today, Mr Oswal said "This is another cynical attempt by Yara to divert attention from other far more important still unresolved commercial matters such as a fair and reasonable and appropriate benchmark price for the product bought by Yara under the Offtake agreement."
