ISX vs ASX, page-777

I am not convinced J.Davies will render a judgement while ASIC v ISX etc is ongoing.
Part of ASX defence is that they are justified in keeping ISX suspended because of disclosure and performance rights, and disclosure is key to ASICs case. J,Davies may not want to implicitly reach a conclusion on the relevance of disclosure while the other case is running with the regulator ASIC involved, unless she decides disclosure is not relevant at all. IMO ASX would appeal that.
Also while NSX may be relevant to what some are referring to as ASX motives, Chi-X are looking to play a bigger role. I think they would welcome a bigger role for ASIC and a reduced role for ASX with regard to regulation. I don't see NSX as relevant at all to either case as far as the courts are concerned.
What ISX may seek from J. Davies is a way of de-listing from the ASX so it can list elsewhere, an interim order.
Of course we don't know if that suits ISX strategy for maximizing damages.
@adsemup With regard to Antares and James Cruikshank, he JC got off lightly. As i understand his Dad lost millions on the soon to be worthless notes ditto all holders of stock or the notes. That situation is quite different to ISX who have made all necessary disclosures but with the argument being about the nature or accuracy of the content. On the other hand that judgement appears to place a lower standard upon Directors on how a disclosure might be read or misread..
I am not a lawyer, would like to hear from those who are...
IMO. DYOR.