@richard987, I think your third option is closest. In my opinion, if Sileach is found to be based on L-max then the ruling will demand LIT to hand over everything that is Sileach to LPD who would become the owner - given that Sileach is an 'improvement' on L-max. Then damages will be awarded due to breaches of confidentiality/ IP and as you mentioned- any non compete clause. This would probably need a separate hearing. License continuation/ cancellation would probably be at the discretion of LPD.
If Sileach is found not to be based on L-max then it will be business as usual for all parties (minus court costs)
@richard987, I think your third option is closest. In my...
Add LPD (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
0.2¢ |
Change
-0.001(20.0%) |
Mkt cap ! $17.17M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 0.2¢ | 0.3¢ | 0.2¢ | $4.152K | 1.701M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 178 | 203070976 | 0.2¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 0.3¢ | 109452442 | 61 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 11/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| LPD (ASX) Chart |