Ann: SML Announcement - Supreme Court Update, page-455

Very disappointing if that is all the reporter gleaned from day one.

That statement is a given. Of course SML think that. Shame on the Herald making people pay for that.

That is not the issue. Which in brief Stonehill, now Synlait, had a contractual obligation to abide by certain terms which included a covenant, And that to remove a covenant certain legal tests under legisltaion had to be met. Synlait had not extinguished the covenant using these tests before breaching the covenant and starting their build.

We won't get full coverage of the trial. It is very technical and there isn't a reporter around capable of digesting the evidence and accuratly reporting in a rag like the Herald.

The only thing to wait for now is the Supreme Court judgement which wil be months away. And SML reportng how much there and Mr Ye's legal costs is costing shareholders