RELATED MATTERS‎ > ‎Law - General‎ > ‎

Contract Law

Much of what I have written about in my dealings with all the parties involved relates to the law of contract. 

I have always maintained that contractual issues are central to our claims against the banks for compensation. Certainly, it will be a major plus if it can be proven that the schemes the CBA, Macquarie and the Bank of Queenland operated together  with Storm were unregistered managed investment ones. Then all bets are off! However, that has yet to be established so contractual breaches must be our fall back position. 

The banks have breached our contracts with them in a number of ways. In so doing they have not met their obligations to us under such contracts and they have violated our contractual rights. No matter how much the banks will protest, they cannot escape the fact that they have done the wrong thing by all their Storm customers. The CBA resolution scheme is an admission of that bank's guilt and should have been a beacon for the other banks to follow suit. I hasten to add that the CBA's resolution scheme was such a dull beacon that the other banks could easily have missed it!

Make no mistake! The banks are powerful but they cannot change the law to suit themselves, much as they would like to do so. We must therefore rely on the Law for justice. 

In the end we will win our case and we will be compensated. No one is saying it will be easy but didn't somone once say here in Australia, "Life was never meant to be easy!"  A politician said it so it must be true!

The question then remains, "If we are compensated, by how much, and do we have the fortitude to ensure that such is adequate?"
Victor Ainslie,
May 1, 2011, 10:26 PM