Griffith Central is the subject of a major Supreme Court case. Photo: Oliver Jacques.
The owner of Griffith Central has assured the public that it’s “business at usual” at the shopping mall, despite a Supreme Court judgment going against him on Thursday (28 August).
The court case related to disputed loans worth $22 million, the major one being between two investment companies – Gemi 169 Pty Ltd allegedly lending Suria Global Pty Ltd $19.5 million in 2020.
Griffith Central owner Frank Violi was alleged to be one of the guarantors of these loans. A mortgage was allegedly taken out over the shopping mall as security under the loan.
In 2022, Gemi 169 Pty Ltd initiated court action against Mr Violi and Suria Global, claiming repayment of the alleged loans was overdue. Gemi and related companies have sought repayment of the loans plus interest in civil court cases that have been ongoing for the past three years.
Mr Violi claimed he never knew of or signed the relevant loan documents or mortgages, describing them as “a stitch-up”. He said his identity was stolen and his name was fraudulently signed on various documents.
Ultimately, the case came down to a judgment on whether Mr Violi authorised the loans and mortgages.
“I accept that the signatures on the documents do not bear Mr Violi’s usual signature … [but] I am satisfied on balance that Mr Violi was aware of the loan and mortgage documentation and authorised a signature being placed on them,” Supreme Court Judge Elisabeth Peden stated in her judgment.
Mr Violi alleged his former associate Jason La Rocca had signed his name or stolen his identity.
“I do not accept Mr Violi’s evidence about Mr La Rocca using his email and telephone,” Judge Peden said.
The judge ruled that Gemi succeeded in demonstrating that Mr Violi knew of and authorised the loan and is entitled to enforce its mortgages [including over Griffith Central], which secured the lent money.
In summing up a complex case involving cryptocurrency, sovereign funds and alleged forged signatures, Judge Peden quoted a message from a witness: “Everything about it is totally strange and nothing makes sense.”
Mr Violi and his lawyer Ben Horne told Region the mechanics of how the judgment would take effect were still to be determined.
“We received a copy of the 122-page judgment on Thursday. Mr Violi will take advice on any options that might be available to him regarding an appeal. In the interim, it’s business as usual for the mall,” Mr Horne said.
The mall has been under external administration since May 2024, when the Supreme Court placed Sydney-based business restructuring expert Andre Lakomy as its receiver and manager.
A company in receivership can continue trading and is not necessarily close to being wound up or liquidated.
Mr Violi said he was confident the mall’s future remained secure and he would eventually be vindicated.
The case was contested in the Supreme Court’s civil jurisdiction, meaning it relates to money or property and is not a criminal matter.
Griffith Central first opened in October 2007, instantly becoming the biggest shopping centre the town had ever seen.
It was originally owned by Melbourne-based investors but was purchased by Mr Violi in 2019.
