@itzgr82baliveI agree with your sentiment about ASX but i think ISX/JK have left themselves with less room to move on the performance rights, and some other matters....
Extracts from REASONS doc
"information provided in confidence by ASIC to ASX in a tele-conference on 1 October 2019 thatASIC had concerns with ISX’s books and records for the Relevant Period;
and
advice from ASIC that it was considering launching a formal investigation into ISX’s compliancewith its disclosure obligations under the Corporations Act."
and 1.5 "The factors leading to ISX’s suspension (other than the confidential information conveyed to ASX thatASIC had concerns with ISX’s books and records for the Relevant Period) were explained to ISX in somedetail in a conference call that took place between representatives of ISX and representatives of ASX on7 October 2019.10"
and 1.11
"Having careful regard to the information ASX has received from ISX (including the 24 JanuarySubmissions17), ASX remains of the view that ISX has committed a number of significant breaches of theListing Rules and that ASX is obliged to refer those breaches to ASIC for consideration of enforcementaction.181.12. ASX understands that ASIC’s enquiries into ISX are ongoing."
From the judgement regarding suppression
"
As to the balance of convenience in relation to the proposed directions, the additional arguments advanced by ASX, in summary form, were that:
(a)the first direction would require ISX to announce whether a particular agreement was “back to back” with an agreement with a subcontractor. ISX did not suggest in its evidence or submissions that it would suffer any prejudice from disclosing this fact;
(b)the second direction would require ISX to engage an independent expert to scrutinise its policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Listing Rule 3.1. ISX did not suggest that this would occasion any prejudice;
(c)the third direction would require ISX to include in its quarterly activity reports certain information about the customer sectors from which its revenue is derived. ISX identified no prejudice flowing from this direction.
"
IMO: Justice Davies wasn't convinced that ISX arguments for suppression went beyond some agreed or waived matters.
If anything ASX' powers over disclosure appear to have been strengthened in general. (C) appears rather more than i think ISX would want to disclose as it positions itself in various market segments.
The issue that is up in the air is whether there can be an orderly market with an overhang on the relevance of performance rights.It isn't clear how or whether the court will determine that or take it on itself to order resolution of that.
One view is the performance rights are a known risk to investors, and there is no problem. ISX counsel might press that.
Why would ASX agree, and to what? At least all of (a,b,c) and continuing escrow pending ASIC outcome.
It looks to me that unless ISX and ASX reach some sort of agreement that is acceptable to ASIC, we will still be in suspension when the trial resumes.
ISX Directors should bite the bullet and do a deal.
Or offer shareholders a deal that replaces the performance rights with something else.
No harm no foul. Not holding any hope for that.
On the bright side, maybe COVID-19 won't be the only other thing by whenever this all gets sorted.
IMO. DYOR
