Pushpay insider trader flags appeal

Brian Dickey, prosecutor for the Financial Markets Authority, opposed continued name suppression for the man found guilty of insider trading. Photograph / Michael Craig

An individual found guilty last week of trading in Pushpay shares using inside information has argued his name suppression should continue as identifying him could, should he succeed in overturning the verdict and have his case reheard, impinge on his rights to a fair (re)trial.

John Dixon KC, acting for the guilty individual, flagged his intent to challenge the verdict at the Court of Appeal and said: “We would argue there’s good ground for the court to find the jury’s findings were unreasonable.”

Dixon sought continued name suppression for his client, having successfully obtained such an order in early 2022 after charges were first brought, in order to protect his client’s rights to a fair retrial and avoid identifying connected parties involved in the share transactions in question who were also deserving of name suppression.

Brian Dickey, who earlier this month successfully prosecuted the four-week trial for the Financial Markets Authority (FMA), opposed the suppression application for the guilty individual.

“The main position for the Crown is open justice. The public should know about this case: It’s a useful account of what shouldn’t be done,” he said.

Dickey said talk of a retrial was “speculative” and argued Dixon’s grounds for belief the verdict could be overturned “has no basis,” and even if such a retrial was achievable it would be years away and unlikely to take place before 2025.

Barrister Robert Stewart, acting for media organisations NZME and RNZ, joined Dickey in opposing the guilty individuals’ continued name suppression application saying it had originally been imposed to ensure a fair trial and this had taken place.

“Name suppression that’s been in place has served its purpose. The trial has concluded, and a verdict has been handed down,” Stewart said.

The charge of insider trading carries a maximum penalty of five years in jail, a fine of up to $500,000, or both.

The criminal proceedings centred around the resignation and sell-down of shares of former Pushpay co-founder and director Eliot Crowther in June 2018.

The FMA considered Crowther’s intention in this regard to be material information, which, if generally available, would be likely to have a material effect on the price of Pushpay’s shares at the time.

The FMA alleged that the individual knew of and used that information to advise or encourage others to trade in the lead-up to Crowther’s announcement.

Crowther’s trading was legitimate, and neither he nor Pushpay was a party to the proceedings.

Fletcher Pilditch KC, acting on behalf of other parties involved in the questionable Pushpay share transactions but who were not subject to FMA charges, sought permanent suppression orders for the names and identifying details of his clients on the basis that being linked to insider trading would cause undue hardship and negatively affect their professional reputations.

Justice Gault reserved his decision on the suppression applications and ruled interim orders should remain in force until his ruling was delivered.

Dixon told the court that were Gault to rule against his clients’ application for suppression he intended to also appeal that decision.

Matt Nippert is an Auckland-based investigations reporter covering white-collar and transnational crimes and the intersection of politics and business. He has won more than a dozen awards for his journalism - including twice being named Reporter of the Year - and joined the Herald in 2014 after having spent the decade prior reporting from business newspapers and national magazines.