Just a suggestion. It is always difficult to prove statements are "misleading". It is comparatively easier to look at the issue using "continuous disclosure" and related obligation under ASX rules. I recall court cases based on fault with continuous disclosure had a better chance than trying to prove so and so made "misleading" statements because the blame can be pushed elsewhere. But this cannot be done with continuous disclosure it sits with the company as an entity listing on ASX.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SO4
- Class Action/Lawsuit against SO4/Board
Class Action/Lawsuit against SO4/Board, page-7
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 277 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add SO4 (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
LPM
LITHIUM PLUS MINERALS LTD.
Simon Kidston, Non--Executive Director
Simon Kidston
Non--Executive Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online