Maybe I'm naive but if you have nothing to hide and then hide...

Maybe I'm naive but if you have nothing to hide and then hide nothing.

Well, you need to also appreciate these companies are competitors, and being 'reasonable' and 'fair' then becomes even more important. If ISX has evidence of confidential information it previously provided being leaked, raised it with the ASX but the ASX did nothing about it, then IMO it has the right to withhold subsequent information deemed confidential and challenge the request in court, especially if it doesn't understand why the ASX has even requested the information.

It's 'unreasonable' for the ASX to request information under 18.7 without a clear explanation of why it's required (akin to saying we are requesting the information just because we can).



If 3.17A says a summary is sufficient, if the summary becomes insufficient to the ASX, then it needs to explain to the company why the summary has now become insufficient. But the ASX has instead chosen to invoke 18.7. If you were running the company, how would you feel? Let's be reasonable here...

Here's another example - the very first query had no apparent connection to the reasons given for the suspension?!