ANZ chairman Paul O’Sullivan said: “The board has been considered and very deliberate in its assessment of remuneration outcomes. We are confident in our position and we will defend this matter vigorously.”
The case comes as governance experts and investors have demanded accountability at ANZ over its run of problems. Whether there has been an appropriate level of accountability is likely to be a hot topic at the bank’s annual meeting next week.
Loading
Proxy adviser CGI Glass Lewis has advised investors to vote against ANZ’s remuneration report next week, citing “insufficient remuneration consequences”, after ANZ received a hefty protest vote of 38.3 per cent against its executive pay report last year, delivering it a “first strike”. In contrast, influential proxy firm Ownership Matters has advised investors to support ANZ’s remuneration report.
ANZ’s annual report, published in November, said neither Elliott nor his successor, Nuno Matos, had received a short-term bonus for the 2025 year, and the bank had also cancelled incentives that Elliott was due to receive.
The case promises to put the spotlight on the power that boards have to hold former executives accountable by withholding pay – an issue that often arises when a company is facing significant problems or damage to its reputation.
The ANZ board took the action against Elliott, and also decided to pay no short-term bonuses to its top Australian-based executives, after ANZ earlier this year agreed to a $240 million penalty to settle four separate legal cases from the corporate watchdog. In doing so, the bank admitted to unconscionable conduct on a major government bond deal, incorrect reporting of trading data and misconduct affecting nearly 65,000 customers.
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.
