Restitution of 100% of the lease would not require a valuation I would think? The charge AGS is bringing against Q/H is that they engaged in Misleading and Deceptive conduct before the negotiation and extention of the terms of the earn-in period. I can't see how a valuation would be required for this?
Either Q/H broke the terms of the agreement or they didn't. If they did the agreement would be void and AGS would get back the full 100%. If they didn't the 25% AGS stake remains.
Might be looking at it too simply but either the agreement is torn up or it isn't. I don't see how you can partly break the agreement!
Why are valuations usually obtained?
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?