The former head of WAW Credit Union has faced court on allegations he failed to properly discharge his duties at the company and made false and misleading statements to the board.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Peter Challis allegedly concealed information from its board about the source of 627 ballots cast in November 2015 board elections.
The votes, all made for two candidates from one internet address, allegedly led to the wrong person being elected.
The Wodonga Magistrates Court on Wednesday heard Challis had met with Neil Evans, who ran financial planning business Quadrant, prior to the election.
The business referred clients to WAW.
Challis allegedly had a preference in the election for David Iverson and Tim Frazer to be elected to the board over Tracey Toohey and Ali Pockley.
The court heard Evans had told Challis he would lodge proxy votes in favour of Mr Iverson and Mr Frazer.
IN OTHER NEWS:
While Mr Iverson would have been elected without the 627 votes, the court heard Mr Frazer wouldn't have.
The prosecution said the "unusual step" was taken by Challis during the vote for a live tally board to be accessed by his assistant.
He was updated, along with Evans, the court heard, and a large number of votes were lodged by Evans.
Prosecutor Patrick Doyle said Challis had a duty to let the board know the source of the 627 votes.
He was asked by the board to investigate the votes in 2016 and make inquiries with WAW's IT manager to look into the IP address used to lodge the votes.
The court heard the IT worker used a search tool.
The court heard that search linked back to Quadrant and the worker told Challis, who failed to let the board know.
Challis allegedly told the worker to keep the information to himself.
Mr Doyle said when Challis' assistant suggested he tell the board of the arrangement with Evans, he told her to "shut her mouth".
The prosecution argues Challis made misleading statements and concealed information.
"The anomalies in that election gave rise to a real question as to its integrity, and was in the best interest of WAW as a company to find out what had happened, investigate whether what happened raised any (questions) about the integrity of its election, and determine any future policies and rules for the governance and board elections in light of that information," Mr Doyle said.
The matter was investigated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
Defence lawyer Garry Livermore told magistrate Ian Watkins he would have to rule on whether his client had exercised a power that he had, and did not do that in the best interests of the credit union.
He said it wasn't alleged anything he did was for his own gain, nor was he a party to Evans lodging votes without proper authorisation.
Challis believed Evans was authorised to lodge the votes, Mr Livermore said.
The court heard there were privacy concerns about the votes lodged, concerns about the company's reputation, and issues about approaching Quadrant.
A committal is scheduled to run for four days.
