who frustrated the ifca deal, page-3

Optimix,
your conclusion "The judgment was made on the fact that $60m of bondholders' money was invested with Chemeq and IFCA had none. It was not made on the basis of insufficient financial information" is clearly at odds with McKECHNIE J judgment where he wrote:
"IFCA has imposed time limits on the subscription, as it is entitled to do. IFCA has declined to provide much financial information, as it is also quite entitled to do. This of course is not IFCA's application but Chemeq's. As a result of IFCA's decisions, however, Chemeq has been unable to secure the bondholders' agreement. The variation would otherwise greatly affect the status quo pending the resolution of the appeal and I therefore dismiss the application.

Why are you unable to face the truth and like to post lies?