I'm not a lawyer so can't speak on all this with much expertise.
If someone knows the level of proof or whatever legal terminology is used for proving something like the Lottoland I would be interested to know.
From the cheap seats I would have thought a statement from i.e. lottoland saying that was the reason would be required. Based on your screenshot there ISX are saying its inferred. Proving inference can be a difficult thing.
Again not a lawyer so can't speak too much about the particulars
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SP1
- Ann: Cont Disclosure Independent Expert Report & Supplementary
Ann: Cont Disclosure Independent Expert Report & Supplementary, page-152
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 17 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 SP1 (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
EL8
ELEVATE URANIUM LTD
Murray Hill, MD & CEO
Murray Hill
MD & CEO
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online