When Zagg ships a ‘fraudulent’ claim it’s not a scam: NZS v Australia

New Zealand has accused Australia of “fraudulently” shipping a $4 million claim from a private firm to the New Zealand Stock Exchange.

Zagg has accused the Australian company of shipping a fraudulently-made claim from one of its subsidiaries to the NZSEX that was “sourced from a non-NZSEX company” and “created for the sole purpose of defrauding the NZSC.”

Zagg said on Wednesday that the Australian authorities had “no evidence” that the NZSEC had any involvement in the alleged scam.

Zaggers lawyers told The Dominion Post that their firm was the only one of six New Zealand firms involved in the claim that was not sourced from the NZ Securities Exchange (NZSE).

The company also told The Post that it was working to resolve the dispute, which was first raised by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

“We’re working with the New York Attorney General’s office to determine if any further action is appropriate, including seeking sanctions against the Australian Government,” Zagg said.

“The NZSEC’s role is to ensure that legitimate claims are investigated and if warranted, they are resolved.”

The company said it was “pleased to have resolved the dispute with the Australian Attorney General”.

“We hope that the New Zealander authorities will be supportive of our ongoing efforts to ensure the integrity of the market,” it said.

The NZ Securities Commission declined to comment on the matter.

The issue has reignited a debate over the role of Australia in the stock market, with Australian regulators trying to impose some tough restrictions on the Australian exchange.

Australia has been accused of a raft of other scams and alleged breaches of investor protections since its entry into the world of stock trading.

In the latest example, the New South Wales Supreme Court ruled last month that the trading firm Transmeta should not be allowed to conduct a sale of its shareholding in its New Zealand shares without being approved by the regulator.

It is the latest dispute over Australia’s regulatory role in the financial services industry.

Last month, the United States Supreme Court overturned the Federal Circuit’s decision that the Nasdaq market would remain open to foreign stock market operators after the US Justice Department said that the Federal Reserve was the “only appropriate regulator” for the market.

Related Post