opes ruling, page-17

Pokerface he is allowing discovery so that you guys go away feeling that the system is doing all it can to assist you. Certainly the case as pleaded by Slaters was poorly drafted and presented to the court. Basically there was no cause of action established in the pleadings as I read it.

As I said you have been given a lifline in that in some generous spirit da Fink has allowed the case to be redrafted once some discovery has occurred. As I read the judgement even after this he thinks your case has only a remote chance of success unless in the discovery process that smoking gun all of you have gone on about is found.

I realise that for many of you are hurt angry and almightly p*ssed off. If I were in your situation I would be no different to you guys. Whilst you may consider what has happened to be theft the legal system may not. Many people forget that the courts only apply the rules which have been set and these rules may end up with "justice" not being done.

So Pokerface if you want to have a go at me fine you can contact me via email and I will be happy to respond to you. However you have to accept that your case is not cut and dried and you have many legal procedural hurdles to jump before you get to a possible full hearing of your claims sometime within the next five years or more. Just consider how long it took for the court to hand down the Bell decision.