give it a rest, please, page-42

Totolapse,
I am glad that you and resourced, both persons with law degrees forecast the same as me. As for Sherlock, his basic premise is that an injunction is already in effect - which is wrong. His second premise that the dismissal precedents against SMSL in Kuala Lumpur and the appeal court do not apply to the case at hand - is also wrong. When one starts with mistaken assumptions one ends with wrong conclusions. Anybody can hold the stick in both ends and later claim that he was right no matter what was the outcome.

What makes me sure that an injunction is not coming is simply the fact that SMSL can not prove that continuing with the TOL will cause irreparable damage. On the other hand, it is obvious that stopping the TOL will cause a lot of damage and SMSL is unable to guarantee that they can pay such damage if a judicial review finds that they were wrong.