shareholder action

Just some comments on actions going forward

Usually when companies go under banks are involved and invariably pulled the plug. In this case seems to be unique as no banks are involved.

When a company goes into V.A. secured lenders then appoint a receiver to protect their interests, again in this case it appears no secured lender, I assume the CN has no ranking (anyone know for sure?) if they do have some form of ranking they can appoint a receiver.

Administrators/Receivers are given guarantees by the secured lenders to continue with their work and get paid, in this case I expect the administrator will seek creditor approval to tap into the cash on hand ($9M)

Any serious litigation against the company must be funded and I can't see the creditors coughing up any proceeds to defend it, whereas in the SOG case banks were biggest losers if shareholders got up in court and paid for action.

IMF work on 30-40% commission and need a significant amount of shareholders who can prove loss to sign up before they spend any funds.

From what I have seen of releases directors put enough warnings out especially in that presentation showing is was casflow negative at certain metal prices which proved to be optimistic as time progressed.

Does anyone have a copy of CN deed and JV agreement?