I liked the arguments put forward by ISX counsel when asked by ASX "well, we need to understand what it was that
Clayton Utz was actually asked to do and what they were given."
Further, why is ASX asking for more documents (via discovery) when in fact they believed the entire case was open-shut with the information they had, and then releasing a SOR. Bunch of nut jobs working in ASX. Eventually, the courts will see through this facade, and finally, the media and the public will ask our political leaders how they overlooked such an event and locking out more than 10,000 shareholders.
On that note, our counsel's argument sums up my thoughts re. discovery.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SP1
- Ann: ASIC v ISIGNTHIS LTD & ANOR
Ann: ASIC v ISIGNTHIS LTD & ANOR, page-75
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 271 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)