However, the Court of Criminal Appeal has found that the verdicts on both counts against Mr Gregg were unreasonable.
The appeals court said that the lack of evidence about the intention and knowledge of Asian Global in entering into the agreement “meant there was a reasonable doubt that the agreement was a sham”.
It also found that the Crown “had not been able to exclude beyond reasonable doubt the hypothesis that the parties agreed to enter into an agreement in the nature of the buy and sell agreement and a loan in substitution for the infusion obligation.”
In addition, the appeals court held that the trial judge erred in not admitting evidence from a document that referenced a centralised approach to steel procurement and that there were various “errors of law” in directions to the jury.
These included the trial judge’s direction that the jury had to be unanimous about the falsity of only one of the purposes of the payment instruction, in circumstances where the Crown case had changed in the closing address.
The court also held that there was “a substantial miscarriage of justice” arising from the prosecutor’s closing address.
Mr Gregg’s charges each carried a maximum of two years’ imprisonment but he was allowed to serve home detention.
More to come