Pipeline-in-a-drug, page-85

That's right, good faith and "fair dealing" are lawfully enforceable elements in a contract in the US. Which is why I adhere to the notion that Acadia would be sued immediately if they were deliberately blocking Neuren even if they had no interest in pursuing a given undisclosed indication. Indeed, one could argue that if Acadia try to stymie Neuren in its progress or negotiations with a third party then that would be intentional interference and it is illegal.

It appears to me the main thrust of this contract is to ensure Acadia's interests are protected to make sure Neuren does not undermine them. How is it that a company can exist as a shell under the direction of Acadia, it is a commercially viable entity in its own right and with all the protections and rights that come with being a company.

I don't doubt Hottod's logic and analysis, she is far smarter than I am and I respect her a great deal. But I think there's a bigger picture element here where not all the minutiae are gathered to give a clear picture on how Neuren can proceed in future dealings. I hold that Neuren has some wiggle room to push back on Acadia if they become unfriendly and obfuscate or interfere in Neuren's dealings.