Australian startup GetSwift is now facing a third lawsuit over alleged deceptive conduct toward investors who purchased shares in the company throughout 2017.
Law firm Phi Finney McDonald filed a class action against the SaaS logistics company late last week, making the allegation that GetSwift contravened its continuous disclosure obligations by failing to disclose to the market the termination of certain contracts, and that its conduct caused its share price to trade higher than the price “that would have prevailed in a properly informed market”.
The law firm argues investors that acquired shares between 24 February 2017 and 19 January 2018 suffered a loss by acquiring shares at an inflated price.
The class action follows two previously launched class actions related to the same issues. In March the startup confirmed law firm Corrs Chambers Westgarth had launched legal action against it. That class action will be led by litigation financier Vannin Capital.
In February a class action was launched against GetSwift by Squire Patton Boggs in the Federal Court of NSW, which claimed GetSwift made announcements exaggerating the revenue potential of contracts with FruitBox, Fantastic Furniture and the Commonwealth Bank when the contracts were not firmly established.
An article in January in the Australian Financial Review reported that a number of GetSwift customers announced as multi-year agreements, including Fantastic Furniture and FruitBox, never went past the pilot stage.
Earlier this week, the AFR reported that the Federal Court’s Justice Michael Lee, during a case management hearing last week, said GetSwift should face only once class action. A hearing to determine which of the earlier filed class actions should proceed is in progress.
In a letter to shareholders this morning, GetSwift acknowledged the class action being served against it by Phi Finney McDonald, in addition to the two other class actions, and that it would vigorously defend any class action.