Clive Palmer has claimed he still controls billions of dollars, while fighting a legal bid by government appointed liquidators to freeze $200m of his fortune as part of efforts to claw back money from the collapse of Queensland Nickel.
Palmer also received a backhanded compliment in the supreme court over a “very clever arrangement” days before QN fell into voluntary administration that allowed his own companies to leapfrog others, including almost 800 employees, in claims for money owed.
The former federal MP, representing himself, volunteered for the witness box on the first of a scheduled two days of hearings on the freezing application by PPB Advisory, which claims there is a risk he will shift assets overseas before the court can rule on whether he should repay money.
Justice John Bond, who suggested his decision hinged on whether there was “sufficient risk” Palmer would hide his money rather than proof of his intentions or any steps taken so far, noted the business magnate’s sworn testimony at times contradicted evidence in earlier proceedings.
Palmer, whose true wealth has long been a matter of speculation, said in passing, under cross-examination: “I’ve got billions of dollars in assets”.
Barrister Shane Doyle, for PPB Advisory, stopped to ask him for clarification: “Did you say billions?”
“Yes,” Palmer said.
Doyle repeatedly pressed Palmer on the purpose of two of his other companies, China First and Waratah Coal, claiming a secured $135m debt against QN days before its collapse in January 2016.
Palmer insisted it was part of a move to allow QN to use undeveloped mining tenements held by Waratah as security to borrow money to stave off collapse.
The $135m charge was registered a day after QN received a letter of demand from rail company Aurizon seeking payment of outstanding debts by 18 January.
Doyle asked Palmer if he understood the upshot of the charge – which came as voluntary administration loomed for QN – was that his own interests would “rank above unsecured creditors” such as Aurizon and employees owed entitlements.
“I didn’t think of that at the time,” Palmer said.
Doyle later commented: “I’m going to flatter you, Mr Palmer. That was a very clever arrangement.”
Doyle accused Palmer of lying to the court about the substance of any promise to make assets available for QN, contending the true purpose of the deal was to “isolate your companies” from outside claims for money. He said the document executing the $135m charge contained no such promise of security to QN.
Palmer said lawyers had prepared the document and he had never read it, but he thought there was a separate “letter” to this effect.
Doyle accused Palmer of “not giving truthful evidence” there had been “not a word” previously about this letter in his previous eight sworn statements to the court.
“That’s my recollection. It is what it is,” Palmer said.
PPB Advisory liquidator Stephen Parbery, who gave evidence via videolink from Italy, stumbled in cross-examination over his rationale for a freezing order over assets including a yacht that was not owned in Palmer’s name.
Barrister Dominic O’Sullivan, for Palmer’s companies including China First, asked Parbery why he pressed ahead in seeking an order to freeze the $5m yacht when there was evidence filed in the case that it belonged to Palmer’s daughter.
O’Sullivan raised a similar issue with Palmer’s Avoca resort on the Gold Coast, which according to defendant affidavits was subject to a partial subdivision sale in the ordinary course of its business, rather than being offloaded by Palmer as foreshadowed by Parbery.
Parbery admitted he had not read affidavits filed last month outlining those claims, and that he could not say how he would have the court test them.
Parbery said he relied on his lawyers and his staff to bring such matters to his attention.
O’Sullivan asked Parbery whether he still held concerns about Palmer dissipating money from the $23.5m sale of his Mineralogy House headquarters in Brisbane, when the proceeds sat in a local bank account.
Parbery said he did as “it doesn’t matter where [the funds] are sitting, they’re available for Mr Palmer to deal with as he sees fit”.
He said the risk of money being shifted to frustrate any future court order sprang from the “size of the litigation” at stake, its prospects of success and the fact “liquid assets” such as the Mineralogy House windfall were “highly mobile in how they can be dealt with”.
