‘Counterfactual Disclosure?’ Myer Shareholders Did Not Suffer Loses
Myer shareholders won’t be taking home any extra cash today after the Federal Court ruled they did not suffer any financial loss despite winning their landmark case against the retail giant over expected profits in 2015.
As reported by the AFR, the Federal Court of Australia ruled in favour of shareholders after the department store retailer was found in breach of its continuous disclosure obligations by not adjusting its 2015 profit guidance correctly.
However, despite winning the case, Justice Jonathan Beach decided Myer shareholders did not suffer any financial loss due to sceptical market analysis that placed market consensus lower than the department store’s actual profit guidance.
Justice Beach identified that Bloomberg consensus was factored in resulting in the counterfactual disclosure.
‘I’ve also found on your own expert analysis that the actual share price was factoring in Bloomberg [market] consensus. So accepting those steps, how do you put the case any shareholders have suffered loss and damage based upon that counterfactual disclosure?’ Justice Beach asked the shareholders’ barrister Norman O’Bryan.
Mr O’Bryan is arguing his clients should be given the chance to prove their financial losses as a result of the counterfactual disclosure.
A future hearing will be held in March to asses evidence from the shareholder’s team.