Aussie seeks Superloop comms
Aussie Broadband is fighting to access details that would allow it to keep its slice of rival Superloop.
Aussie Broadband is gearing up to request directors of Superloop provide copies of their emails and WhatsApp messages, as it seeks to maintain its near 20 per cent in Superloop.
During a Federal Court hearing in Melbourne, Aussie Broadband's legal counsel announced plans to formally request Superloop directors to preserve their communications from the past week. The company aims to serve a notice to Superloop directors shortly, signalling a heightened legal battle between the two firms.
The legal tussle traces back to Superloop's directive for Aussie Broadband to scale down its holdings to under 12 per cent, citing a violation of Superloop's constitution.
Justice David O’Callaghan of the Federal Court is set to deliberate on Aussie Broadband's plea to overturn Superloop’s order on March 27.
The controversy stems from Aussie Broadband's acquisition of shares in Superloop without securing prior approval from Singaporean regulators, a necessary step given Superloop's operations in Singapore.
This oversight was brought to light through a correspondence from Superloop's legal team on March 3, leading Aussie Broadband to seek retroactive approval from Singapore's Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) for its 19.9 percent stake.
Complications arise as Superloop demands Aussie Broadband to diminish its holdings by April 2, a deadline set amidst uncertainty over IMDA's decision, which could take up to a month.
Aussie Broadband argues that complying with Superloop's order would inflict substantial financial losses and impede its potential acquisition efforts.
The legal action comes after Aussie Broadband acquired its stake in Superloop before presenting a $466 million takeover proposal, which was subsequently declined by Superloop’s board.
Aussie Broadband now seeks legal intervention to challenge the enforceability of Superloop’s divestiture order, alleging that the directive constitutes an oppressive and unfairly prejudicial exercise of power.
Aussie Broadband's counsel says that the core of their legal challenge does not question Superloop's authority to mandate share sales but scrutinises the manner in which this power has been exercised.