Building director acquitted

FACT,

IT IS VERY HARD TO FACTUALLY FIND THAT HE IS MALICIOUS OR DISHONEST. IN I FOUND HIM REFRESHINGLY HONEST

MAGISTRATE DZENITA BALIC

THE director of a multimilliondollar Gold Coast building company has been acquitted of lying on a form filed with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.

Salam Zaki Bettridge faced a trial in the Southport Magistrates Court on Thursday for one count of making a statement that is false or misleading in a material particular. He pleaded not guilty.

It had been alleged Mr Bettridge signed a form to deregister Professional Project Services on December 6, 2019, and claimed no legal proceedings on foot.

The court was told there were legal proceedings in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal and the Supreme Court of Queensland.

Mr Bettridge claimed at the time he had delegated handling of the legal issues and thought they had wrapped up when he signed the form.

Magistrate Dzenita Balic found Mr Bettridge not guilty.

She said she based her decision on audio played to the court of Mr Bettridge being interviewed by ASIC officers.

“It is very hard to factually find that he is malicious or dishonest,” she said.

“In fact, I found him refreshingly honest.”

Magistrate Balic said she found Mr Bettridge may ought to have known about the legal proceedings but believed he did not know at the time.

During the audio recording Mr Bettridge explained the proceedings were over a $36,000 debt which Summit Roofing Holdings claimed to have been owed.

Professional Property Services were disputing a QCAT ruling made about that debt.

Mr Bettridge said he did not follow the case closely and he asked an employee to deal with it.

He said as a company with a turnover of between $30m and $40m, a $36,000 was not significant.

Mr Bettridge said he was aware of the court proceedings in September 2019 but thought they had been resolved by December of that year when he signed the form.

He also said in his interview that the reason the company was being wound up was due to a dispute with a former partner in the business.

The matter was adjourned to April 8 for a decision on Mr Bettridge’s legal costs.