I would like to say this, ASIC are not going to do anything outside their jurisdiction, nor should they. ASIC have a duty of being the authority that regulates the 2001 corporations act.
There is no section saying you can't treat someone badly.
There may be in the Fair work act but not in the 2001 corporations act.
IMO, The calling of VA seems like it was done for improper and nefarious purpose and really does look like it falls outside the valid reasons why VA can be called.
It can only be used for the reason of insolvency or possible insolvency.
Here are some facts that you can check on the administration and the reason used for calling VA.
Note; if you read the comments that Popovski (D1980) put forward, you will find that his reasons behind the use of VA are outside valid use.. see link and the comments below the story.
http://3dprintingindustry.com/2015/...sons-from-a-life-disassembled-by-3d-printing/
The company had more than $280,499.43 in the bank at the end of December when VA was called.
There was the $200,000 that they were trying to get Jason to accept and NO creditor was calling on any debt! Doesn't sound insolvent to me. Even if you consider the amount of money that was paid out in the creditors trust.
The DOCA was prejudicial and oppressive against one or more creditors.
2 creditors were not paid.
It has been falsely reported by the admin that all creditors were paid 100 cents in the dollar.
The administrator took the $280,499.43 from the account of 3DG and started a new account under the administration. Somehow only $248,554.15 made it into the new account.
Yet the administrator mentions in his report that he identified an amount of $256 odd thousand. I would love anyone to tell me how this can happen legally. I do not know how some 39k went missing, Neither Jason or I can guess any valid legal reason how this money could've gone missing or where it went to.
IMO, if you look at the evidence that Jason had published, it is clear that there are quite a few things wrong with this picture.
An interesting aspect to this is Conidi's reluctance to talk about it.
You can draw your own conclusion as to why he has nothing to say.
Tell me, is it in the shareholders best interest to keep a lot of information from them?
Do you imagine why it would be a good idea to get rid of the person who had the vision, the ability and the 3d printers that investors bought into?
If you were Jason and you had of build designed these printers, would you have sold all your shares for 200k and sign a noncompete contract?
Is it in the best interests of the shareholders to get rid of the only director with any engineering experience?
Was it in the best interests of the shareholders to use VA and delay (and risk) the company's ASX listing for over 1 year?
Do you think an accountant is going to appreciate aspects the aspects of manufacturing and development of a product of this nature?
If you look at the other Directors, Pertile had no experience in engineering, design or manufacturing and nor did Popovski. Popovski is a qualified electrical engineer in Macedonia, but that is not recognised in this country.
The only reason Popovski was involved was because Jason invited him to join the new company because he kicked in some money for the first printer Jason built and developed.
Do you really think if Jason had of published any false documents, that they would still be there?
John, Frank and Dejan spent considerable amount of shareholders money on lawyers dealing with My Simpson and it seems to me to have been a big waste of money.
Sections 82 & 85 of the 1958 crimes act, cover
Obtaining financial advantage by deception & False statements by company directors. I have put it to jason that it is my belief that these 2 acts may apply to his case.
I would love to hear other peoples views on this subject.
This is all my opinion only. I am not a lawyer or financial adviser.
DYOR.
