TerryA... my take is that the law says that:
- if you know something valuable about an asset
- and are in a relationship with the owner of that assets
- and you dont share that knowledge
- and you derive a financial advantage consequential of that less than candidness,
then any or all gain might by a court be taken from you and returned to its owner ... the basic ideal is to restore the damaged person to the palce that would have been had they not been misled.
all a lot of ifs and buts and maybe and could bes in there IMO. But that is what I understand the basic components of AGS claim is. Its target is certainly 100% (ie get the 75% back) but it would be pretty happy with 50.1% I suspect.
of course only a judge can sort this mess out...
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- appeals case
TerryA... my take is that the law says that:- if you know...
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 18 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 AGS (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
LPM
LITHIUM PLUS MINERALS LTD.
Simon Kidston, Non--Executive Director
Simon Kidston
Non--Executive Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online