"l think where CHM will come undone is being able to prove or...

"l think where CHM will come undone is being able to prove or establsih a constructive trust that Jack hills was intended as some sort of joint venture of something"

for someone that has been following this so closely you still seem to have a struggle understanding what a constructive trust is and what CHM have to prove

they don't need to show an intended JV or anything remotely like that - all they need to show is that MMX received ill-gotten gains, i.e. used property that did not belong to itself to derive a benefit

a constructive trust is a REMEDY requested by a claimant - it does not create an actual trust. instead of wanting what was taken, a claimant can claim an interest in the benefit derived

there are plenty of cases were constructive trusts have been AWARDED after a court case has been won.. eg. a simple case often used an an example is where an employee funneled money from her employer and used it to buy real estate - the employer was awarded a constructive trust over the property she bought.

on another related issue - does anyone have any actual information regarding when the judgement will be handed down? (and not the usual guesswork that goes on in these threads)