does anyone think the form of these resolutions are unusual?...

does anyone think the form of these resolutions are unusual?

RESOLUTION 1 – Removal of Director (Mr Robert Hubbard) and
appointment of Director (Mr Colin Robert Goodall)

RESOLUTION 2 – Removal of Director (Mr Wrixon Frank Gasteen)
and appointment of Director (Mr Nick Bolkus)

RESOLUTION 3 – Removal of Director (Mr Peter Moore) and​

appointment of Director (Mr Stuart Francis Howes)

imho, each resolution means all or nothing.

usually in these situations Res 1 would be split:
ie Res 1 would be for removal of Hubbard,
then
Res 2 would be appointment of Goodall.
etc
etc.

But the way these res are presented, for example, if you want Hubbard removed you can only achieve that IF also get Goodall as a replacement?

What happens for example, if you like one but not the other?
What happens if you want all 6 on the board???
ie you cannot do that.

it's strange --  I read the Explanatory Memo as that the composition and form of the Resolutions are as presented by the Requisitioners, not CTP ???

So s/h imho, are not getting the ability to pick and choose?
no room for compromise?

cheers