It raises another question, if they are obliged to use rule 17.3 and the absolute discretion to suspend ISX to meet their market license obligations - Clause 4 and corporations act, why have they said that the suspension was done in consultation with ASIC.
My understanding also is that ASX may have referred this to ASIC. Somewhere in the defence or statement of claim I thought it stated that ISX was under investigation since October 2019. That says to me, that there was no investigation prior to October re: ISX. I could be wrong on this point though.
Why didn't ASIC give a written direction to suspend, if ASX had referred this to ASIC as part of the memorandum of understanding. My opinion would be that, there was insufficient evidenced that suggested that a written direction was required, hence it could be assumed that not suspending ISX would not be in breach of Clause 4 and the corporations act. I am guessing this is why ISX have requested the ASX and ASIC communications listed on schedule B for the discovery items.
Although we are not privy to any conversations or documents, I don't think that ASIC would say, you need to suspend ISX or we will make the direction to suspend. Hence it appears to me that the reliance on the clause 4 and corporations act as to an obligation to use 17.3 with absolute discretion may not hold up.
I suspect you are right though. It is likely to come back to evidence presented at trial as to the facts prior to October 2, 2019.
ISX Price at posting:
$1.07 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
