What you are saying is broadly correct. The injunction is to enforce the terms of the agreement by stopping the actions in breach.
The fine print is where the problems are and very tricky with investing. You would be hard pressed to find a lawyer prepared to comment on the implications of an agreement that they haven't seen. All they can do is what industry standards are, and that the market cannot be misled over essential terms.
While plenty of companies slip in onerous terms, it all comes down to how much each party wants an agreement to succeed and this ultimately comes down to reputation and commercial reality. Reputation is a big factor in everything.
Not sure if I agree on the Teva risks, maybe I've been so worn down by a barrage of spurious arguments in that regard, that I'm not seeing the obvious. I had expected them to take up more opportunity with MSB, and they are being wrong footed apparently.
One thing I've always been clear about, and consistently stated is that the low number of shares on issue gives MSB a lot of room (to negotiate deals). We are seeing this start to play out.
Some posters are conspicuously silent. Soon a barrage will follow.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)