Good to see NSX still asking the right questions. If JBL is still solvent it should be able to pay its debts to HML. If HML are impairing loans to JBL it implies that JBL can't pay its debts and raises doubts as to its solvency. So which is it McAuliffe? You can't have it both ways!
The answer to question (d) is almost humorous when you consider that three of the company officers between HML and JBL
arethe same people! See table below taken from the most recent TOV decision:
Now just for fun, let's replace the titles of the company officers mentioned in this response with the actual names of those company officers to really get an idea of just how ridiculous the response is:
(d)
The John Bridgeman Limited Board wasStuart McAuliffe and Ross Patane were not involved in the decision made by
the Board of Henry Morgan LimitedStuart McAuliffe, John McAuliffe and Ross Patane to impair the loan. To the extent that
any officers of John Bridgeman LimitedStuart McAuliffe, John McAuliffe and Ross Patane were involved in the decision, it was in a different capacity and with an awareness of their duties and obligations in that capacity. Refer paragraph (a) above. No recommendations were made to
the Board of Henry Morgan LimitedStuart McAuliffe, John McAuliffe or Ross Patane by
any John Bridgeman Limited Board directors or officersStuart McAuliffe, John McAuliffe or Ross Patane.
That last sentence says it all. How much longer will our government allow this farce to continue?
