Not sure of order in terms of directors and backers finding out...

Not sure of order in terms of directors and backers finding out before or after relisting. I thought Koh had resurrected for other reasons.

My limited understanding of the law and how it could be potentially applied in this case is that if the SOC is proved the courts can potentially award CHM a share of assets based on what percentage of the original purchase price was provided by CHM which as someone pointed out appears to be about 30% of original purchase price.

Courts can also strip assets from parties who it proved gained value through illegal acts.

Anyway like this forum it appears we have two boards and two sets of lawyers who are confident of their side being correct.

Thats the crazy part about litigation.

I still say CHM backers should only risk what they can afford to lose as it is an all or nothing punt.

MMX holders should consider a CHM position as insurance but they would have to take the emotion away from this debate to come to that conclusion.

From what I understand we have AH on one side and Freehills on the other so it going to be a formidable battle.

Weirdest part is that neither board was there when what ever did happen happened