HOW A GROUP OF LAWYERS STOLE $20 MILLION FROM UNDER THE NOSE OF REGULATORS WITH THE HELP OF A JUDGE
BS1714/2011, BS8866 & BS 8867/2029
The quality of judicial appointments across Australia can be measured by a recent chain of outrages at the Supreme Court of Queensland and the High Court of Australia.
Dyson Heydon, a former justice of the High Court of Australia succumbed to a finding that he sexually molested 6 of his associates in 2020. Notably, the finding against him was made, not by a court, but by an independent panel of inquiry. And there was good reason for this.
A former Chief Justice of the High Court, Murray Gleeson, and another High Court judge, Michael McHugh SC when confronted with the complaint against Dyson Heydon ignored it.
In 2021 two Family Court judges, both from Queensland, were suspended over complaints of grievous misconduct. One of the two, Judge Andrew Guy, rather than face the ignominy of an open inquiry into his misconduct, committed suicide.
There appears to be an incestuous and stygian culture of privilege, impunity, incompetence, bullying, and partisanship at the highest levels of the Queensland legal system.
The Mango Hill Litigation (BS1714-2011) and its aftermath at the hands of former Chief Justice of Queensland Catherine Holmes is a case study of the problem.
THE HEGEMONY OF PRIVILEGE PEDIGREE AND IMPUNITY
Heydon has a companion he met regularly for lunch in Sydney during the investigation into allegations of his misconduct. That companion turned out to be none other than the colorful Sydney barrister, Francis Maxwell Douglas KC.
Douglas, Heydon’s legal advisor at the time, epitomizes the character of the “untouchables” at the center of corruption and crime in the justice syste and in the legal profession, .
A native of Queensland, Douglas managed to pull off one of the biggest heists in modern legal history. The audacious theft of $20,000,000.00, owed to his instructing solicitor Delta Law “Delta”, and to other creditors of his client Mio Art, was instead with his help, diverted to Douglas and his associates.
Deep in debt at the time, Douglas conspired with his client Mio Art, junior barristers David Keane KC (son of former High Court judge Patrick Keane) Stephen Colditz, solicitor James Nicholas Conomos and a banned and disqualified financial advisor Edmund Galea, to divert the award of $20,000,000.00 away from its rightful beneficiaries into their collective hands.
The award, a settlement from the arbitration of the Mango Hill Litigation, was deposited in the trust account of, twice ‘Queensland lawyer of the year’, James Nicholas Conomos -The Society’s ‘eminence gris’, and by other accounts a ‘judge whisperer’.
A CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST
Conomos distributed that award of $20,000,000.00 at the behest of Silvana Perovich, by passing Delta, who claimed a lien on those monies.
Ignoring the lien, Conomos hastily distributed the award in breach of the Legal Profession Act, and rules that govern the handling of trust money. Conomos acted on the written instructions of one Silvana Perovich.
Perovich was an administrative assistant at Delta for the 11 years Delta acted for her, Mio Art and Richard Spencer. She had no legal right, title or interest in the award money. Nor did she have the legal right or the authority to instruct Conomos on the distribution of the award money.
CONOMOS PLAYING THE INNOCENT BYSTANDER
Conomos was aware of Perovich’s status in the matter. Regardless, he breached his duty as trustee of those funds. The Queensland Law Society aware of Conomos’s breaches of the Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules and the Legal Profession Act has refused to sanction his actions.
Conomos’s complicity in offenses relating to his dealing with trust money, all $20,000,000.00 of it, is captured in emails between he, Mio Art, Silvana Perovich and his client Robert Whitton. Whitton was trustee of the bankrupt estate of Silvana Perovich. Conomos’s breaches were reinforced by his own inculpatory testimony in court in BS 8866 & BS 8867 of 2019.
Instructions on the distribution of the award was conveyed to Conomos in a series of emails from Silvana Perovich, ending with a cryptic “Thanks and can we have some more……see you in the Bahamas“.
Triangulation of communications between Perovich, Conomos and Francis Douglas, Edmund Galea and David Keane, is reinforced by the embedded metadata in emails and phone calls between each of them. The evidence was available but ignored by Catherine Holmes CJ, The Queensland Law Society, and the Legal Services Commission of Queensland.
Perovich explicitly outlined Her’s and Mio Art’s intentions to seize all of the award money, in a letter she wrote to Alan Thompson of Blackstone, a legal firm specializing in costing files in legal matters.
James Conomos brazenly helped Perovich to give effect to her plans over the money. He was trustee of the awarded money and was acutely aware of the liens over them. Conomos also knew that Perovich had no authority or interest in the award funds. A 4 years investigation into the matter has unearthed a treasure trove evidence into what must be the largest money heist by a group of lawyers in Australia.
The audacity and extent of Douglas’s and Conomos’s criminality and misconduct spanning decades in practice, protected by the shield of their reputations, and the willful blindness on the part of the bench and regulators was flagrant.
THE LIENS
Douglas’s genial eccentricity appears to have charmed a fawning bench in Brisbane, sufficient for them to have ignored clear signs of his breaches of professional conduct, the Legal Profession Act, and the criminality concealed in his advocacy.
Douglas pleaded a salvage and a solicitor’s lien which in simple terms meant that his client and his instructor, Delta, would, in priority to all other claims, be entitled to their fees, charges, costs, from out of the proceeds of the award first. The remainder after Delta’s entitlements were satisfied in legal fees, would then be divided between the other creditors of Mio Art, principally, TVM Pty Ltd and Earnings Ltd, the latter 2 being Mio Art’s biggest creditors, TVM and Earnings Pty Ltd who were collectively owed a total of $40,000,000.00
The Queensland Law Society-The QLS- and Legal Services Commission- The LSC-had knowledge of James Conomos’s breaches of the LPA (Legal Profession Act 2007) and ASCR (Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules) in dealing with trust monies. Yet and without reason, both regulators refused to act against Conomos. Conomos continues to hold a current practicing certificate to practice law in Queensland.
FRANCIS MAXWELL DOUGLAS KC
Douglas has a long history of misleading the courts, concealing, and manufacturing evidence with his structured eloquence.
Correspondence, between Douglas and his former spouse Sigrun Baldvinsdottir, in their matrimonial dispute, alleges theft, unlawful transfer of joint assets, bullying and manipulation of financial records by Douglas throughout their marriage. Sigrun has even accused Douglas of stealing money from their children’s trusts and wedging her with legal costs and dubious tax reduction schemes to discourage her from proceeding with an open hearing in the family court.
In his dispute with Sigrun, Douglas impersonated the same solicitor instructing him in the Mango Hill Litigation -when in fact Douglas was self-represented. He used the solicitor’s letterhead, forging his signature in the correspondence without the solicitor’s approval, consent or knowledge. Douglas had the assistance of his then confidante, Silvana Perovich.
The metadata embedded in emails in each of the matters involving Douglas clearly evidences the trajectory of the correspondence and triangulates a conspiracy between Perovich, Douglas, his junior barristers, Conomos, and Galea in the Mango Hill Litigation, and in his dispute with the NAB, CBA and the ATO to who he owed several millions of dollars. The forensic evidence of Douglas and Perovich’s unauthorized use of Delta’s letterhead and its principal’s signatures (forged) on correspondence was available for the court to examine. Yet no one called for it to be put in evidence. Not the QLS, not the court, not the QLSC. It remains available.
Douglas was financially distressed. His problems began in 2015 when ensnared in a “Nigerian” scam over fictitious diamonds from Namibia. He lost around $500,000.00 in that scam and was forced to borrow $50,000.00 from his instructing solicitor, Delta’s principal who he threatened with withdrawal of his services in the Mango Hill arbitration if the loan was not forthcoming.
Douglas lost his waterfront home in Sydney, began drinking heavily and was evicted from his prestigious 7th-floor chambers in the Deutsch Bank building in Sydney’s CBD in 2016.
A complaint filed against Douglas with the LSC and Bar Councils of NSW and Queensland was summarily dismissed as being late and unactionable.
THE ROLE OF CATHERINE HOLMES CJ
There isn’t a more clear-cut example of judicial incompetence, negligence, and intellectual dishonesty than that which Holmes CJ displayed in her handling of BS8866 & BS8867/2019 (“The Emperor Application”). Her judgment delivered in January of 2020, was flawed and lacked any convincing legal basis. In short, she vandalized the proceedings.
Holmes CJ used words like “sham” “fake” and “false “to describe invoices and other documentary evidence presented to her by Conomos and Richard Spencer, solicitor, two key witnesses who Douglas had previously represented and joined in the Emperor Application. Although she clearly understood the gravity of the evidence before her, she was unresponsive.
The Emperor Application was an unsuccessful attempt by parties aligned with Douglas to end the administration of Delta. A liquidator would have had very wide powers to investigate issues leading to the theft of the $20,000,000 had Holmes CJ intervened. But she was clearly unwilling to go there. Holmes CJ instead shielded Douglas and Conomos from that bullet and allowed Delta to remain in the hands of the administrator William Cotter.
The testimony of witness, solicitor Richard Spencer in the Emperor Application, described in detail his involvement in extensive forgery and impersonation, leading to the theft of $20,000,000.00. Holmes CJ failed to act.
WILFUL BLINDNESS
A vital player in the scheme to defraud beneficiaries of the award from the Mango Hill Litigation was Edmund Galea. Guided by Douglas, Galea brazenly lied to the court in the Emperor Application. He lied to the former trustees of Silvana Perovich and Richard Spencer in bankruptcy, SV Partners and in the mediation of the Mango Hill Litigation matter BS1714 of 2011. He lied about having funded Douglas and the Mango Hill Litigation to the tune of several millions of dollars. Galea produced no evidence to corroborate his claims, yet Holmes CJ accepted his testimony at face value.
Galea’s Westpac banking records are at variance with his testimony in court. At the time, Galea was being investigated by the Queensland Police Service for identity theft over a sham $2,000,000 property deal in Brisbane.
Holmes CJ, ignored the admissions of criminality by Galea including his receipt of secret commissions from Douglas and Richard Spencer.
WILLIAM COTTER-THE ADMINISTRATOR
Threatened with a damages claim if he got it wrong, William Cotter, the administrator, capitulated to threats by 3 barristers and was drawn into the vortex of Douglas, Perovich, and Conomos conspiracy. Ostensibly and out of fear, he allowed the second creditors meeting of Delta to be stacked by Conomos, Perovich, Spencer, 4 barristers, Douglas, Keane KC, Colditz and a Sydney barrister Anthony Hopkins.
Desperately in need of money following the Covid pandemic lockdowns, Cotter accepted an undisclosed payment of $375,000.00 in 2023 from James Conomos on behalf of “creditors” to scuttle a claim for $7,000,000.00, a debt he recognized was owed to Delta by Mio Art and Conomos.
A condition of the $375,000.00 payment was that Cotter would refrain from disclosing to other creditors, details of various settlements he entered into with Conomos and his clients in the administration of Delta. He would also agree not to pursue claims against Mio Art for the $7,000,000.00 debt.
“Creditors”, in this context are those individuals Cotter had erroneously and willfully admitted into the administration of Delta, intimidated. Few if any of them qualified as creditors of Delta under the Corporations Act. They failed to disclose receipt of clandestine payments each had received for services rendered to Delta. Cotter has refused numerous requests to produce attendance records and proxies of Creditors as well as other vital information in the administration Delta.
In a letter written by his solicitors, Rose Litigation lawyers, to a creditor of Delta, Cotter, offered what was essentially a bribe to the creditor, to settle a debt Douglas, Spencer and Perovich incurred through Edmund Galea (Galea still then posing as a financial services entity under the name of ALF- Award Litigation Funding). Galea was banned and disqualified by ASIC at the time of the debt.
A condition was attached to Cotter’s offer to the creditor; the creditor should not use the bribe to contribute to the administration of Delta.
Footnote:
In December 2019 in an an article published in a Brisbane newspaper, Catherine Holmes CJ, was identified by implication, by a former president of the Queensland Law Society, as being one of a number of judges, under stress of their workloads who sought refuge in self-medication and alcohol for relief.
Peter James Wilton and Meredith Hicks
This is material downloaded from a major hack of the legal precincts in Australia in 2020. Files were published on the Dark Web on “The Ghost” in 2021, 2022 and 23. Your sources are clearly taken from files downloaded from that website. Why not just publish the material you’ve downloaded? It would make for more interesting reading?
Amazing! And we are meant to trust these people. Keep it coming.
Where’s the proof?
He he he. You’ve got to be kidding. Details of 4 of the barristers/ lawyers named in your story had their personal details (and intimate correspondence) exposed on a hacked dating website. One in a Gay dating website. Clearly they don’t give a rats a*rse about reputations and security.
Do you understand the meaning of scandalizing the courts and upholding the dignity of the courts, not bringing the court into disrepute?
The law society intimidates witnesses and people who complain to them about such matters. They even misinterpret the legal profession act as if they are advocating for the wrong doer.
My daughter attempted suicide after being accused of defalcation which her boss was guilty of. He knew the people at the law society and they did an audit of the firm she worked in. They put all the blame on her because she was asked to withdraw money from trust and pay a third party the money whilst he was away. It was a large sum. She did as she was told. She was not a lawyer in practice yet. So the law society and the legal services commission blamed her and not her boss.
Thank God she survived. Women in legal firms often take the blame in these situations. But women don’t help each other especially if you are not part of the pack. It is part of the culture. You are brave to report this.
The hack from which your information is extracted (which I’ve had limited access to) includes correspondence between parties to the arbitration in this matter; Ashurst, Mills & Oakley, Delta Law, and James Conomos Lawyers. The hack was the result of unprotected correspondence between the Queensland Law Society and solicitor Rozario. It leaked from the Law Society and contains critical information and evidence relating to the entire ‘Mango Hill’ case, arbitration and beyond.
A lawyer who worked for Jim Conomos for a number of years, told a mate of hers what Jim Conomos got up to. She left the firm so as not to be implicated and out of fear.
As a law lecturer with over 40 years in litigation experience I say this: There appears to have been an element of wanton, willful blindness on the part of Mills & Oakley and Ashurst in an effort to settle. I lecture at the faculty of law in a common law country. If you are serious about serving the public good, this is a seminal case which should be shared with the public and academia. Publish the material in your possession if as you suggest privilege has been waived by the barristers and others by their conduct.
The Australian legal system is like that of the third world. It has no moral compass.
Batten down the hatches fleetstreet. A storm is brewing. The best defence is always the truth. Let it prevail.
This leaks in this matter have been doing the rounds for over 3 years now. David Keane is now a silk. If Dyson could walk free and Conomos continues to hold a practicing certificate……?
There isn’t anything more powerful than an idea whose time has come- Those who aren’t making mistakes probably aren’t making anything at all. Publish the documents even if they are from a hackers dump. You could only be “wrong” in someone else’s opinion. But do it.
a funds manager that went belly up about a decade ago who I worked for, lost over a million dollars with James Conomos. Conomos charged like a wounded bull but produced no worthwhile results. Instead he compromised the matter when there was a lot more he could have done to revive the fund and increase returns to unit holders.
In the mid 1970’s I worked at what is today’s Centerlink. There was a Silvana Perovich who also worked at the same office with me. When she left under a cloud, it was discovered by an audit that over $100,000 had been paid out to fictituous and undeserving recipients of government benefits. Her name was linked to most of it. She was never prosecuted. The photo here in your article on the $20 million theft bears a stricking resemblance to the same person if it indeed is the same one. She was blonde then. Not many people with that combination of Slavic name.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Nice work Meredith and Peter
I just chanced upon your blog and this particular article about ‘a crime of law and justice’.
I could not help but notice the names of Catherine Holmes and Peter Clapin mentioned in the same breath and in conjunction with each other in the same matter.
Catherine and Peter were both very much an item at the prosecutors office decades ago. She continued to carry a torch for poor Peter especially after alcohol consumed the man and left him a wreck.
She resigned not long after she took office as the Chief Justice in Queensland. One wonders why.
It is said she came from very humble beginnings. Observing her as a trial judge one wonders whether her attitudes towards some defendants is her pay back to that ‘humble’ class she once belonged to. She has a lot to be humble about.
Don’t blame her much for the mediocrity she ahs turned out to be. I blame the government that appointed her as someone who ticked all the minority boxes of gender, gender and gender.