There is one more momentous decision that needs to be made by the Australia Post board before Ahmed Fahour hangs up his postie hat this Friday: Will he retain the board seat at Dubai logistics group, Aramex. 

Our postie spent more than $200 million acquiring a 10 per cent stake last year, which earned Fahour a board seat. And Fahour has clearly stated his desire to keep it – if the board agrees at a meeting this week.  

It might help that the stock has risen 25 per cent since December – more than offsetting Fahour's hefty packets over the years, which is really saying something. 

Alas, not even Aramex has indicated any desire to keep him. 

"As you are aware, Mr Fahour was nominated by Australia Post to join Aramex board of directors following their investment in the company," said a company spokesman, who indicated the decision on the future of Fahour's role lay with Australia Post. 

Never mind, Fahour's still got a gig as chairman of ASX-listed Pro-Pac Packaging which is 49 per cent owned by Raphael Geminder, the brother-in-law of Australian packaging billionaire Anthony Pratt. 

And there is a lot to focus on at Pro-Pac given its recent performance. 

There have been two profit downgrades this year, including one this month which was the first under the stewardship of Pro-Pac's new chief executive Grant Harrod.

Harrod joined Pro-Pac after a stint at LJ Hooker ahead of the big float that didn't happen. 

Harrod and Fahour have no doubt spent time chewing one of the line items in the recent profit downgrade: "Provision for expenses relating to a legal dispute." 

The dispute in question might be one that CBD stumbled across in the NSW Supreme Court relating to an acquisition in 2013 – which pre-dates both Harrod and Fahour. 

Pro-Pac acquired fresh meat packaging provider, Eco Food Pack Australia (EFP), for $6 million plus a "completion payment", deferred payments, and incentive payments if the business was going really well.   

The Supreme Court judgment indicated that the nuptials ended in a nasty spat. 

The various disputes included differences of opinion on representations made before the acquisition, regarding EFP's major customer Baiada, and poultry giant Inghams.

This led to the question of whether this resulted in a breach of warranty and what loss Pro-Pac suffered as a result. And if it still had to pay the deferred payments.    

There was also the issue of a $200,000 advance to EFP's managing director – someone referred to as Mr Beecham – and whether it was a loan to be repaid, or an advance of incentive payments. 

Justice Robert McDougall did not appear to be overly impressed with some of the testimony by witnesses appearing before him. This included Beecham, Pro-Pac's CEO at the time, Brandon Penn, who remains a director and significant shareholder, as well as Pro-Pac's long-serving chief financial officer, Mark Saus.

"I formed the view that each of them was unreliable," Justice McDougall said of the trio.

He noted that Beecham denied he was under financial stress at the time of the negotiations and it was alleged this was one of the reasons he made misrepresentations to Penn and Saus to clinch the sale, and his loan from Pro-Pac. 

"His contemporaneous emails (there is no need to recite their sordid details) made it clear that he was suffering very severe financial stress at the time, and that he was desperate to get his hands on the loan," said the judgment. 

Justice McDougall was equally troubled by the remarkably similar testimony by Penn and Saus when it came to Pro-Pac's reliance on representations made by Beecham with regard to EFP's clients. 

"Whether this stunning resemblance reflects a mere coincidence, that two men, seeking to recollect the words used as best they could two years or more after the event, settled on precisely the same formulation, or whether it reflects some over-enthusiastic use of the word processor, is open to question," said the judgment. 

The outcome was a split decision, so to speak. 

While the judgment found the Baiada representations from EFP were misleading or deceptive, Pro-Pac's boys did not rely on it and hence the company did not suffer a loss from the contravention. The judgment found Pro-Pac was liable to pay EFP the deferred payment. 

But the judgment also found Beecham's advance was in fact a loan which he has to repay, along with accrued interest.

The good news is Fahour's substantial stake in Pro-Pac is worth only slightly less than what he paid in 2014.   ​

Safe n Hardie

Executives from the asbestos-coated James Hardie were obviously in town recently and lobbed their investor presentation to the ASX. 

It included some interesting commentary, like the fact the company has "an unwavering focus on the health and safety of our people". 

Better late than never we guess. 

And given the fact the company's product range includes building cladding – James Hardie gave a nod to the  tragic London Grenfell tower fire and told investors that its ExoTec cladding is "deemed non-combustible". 

No further clarification was provided on the presentation material, but CBD is sure that would be enough for the investors, and anyone using the product. 

The Grenfell tower cladding was provided by Alcoa-spin-off, Arconic Inc.

Follow CBD on Twitter. Got a tip? ckruger@fairfaxmedia.com.au