Excellent questions Safauroa - I wish I had the answers. I wish...

Excellent questions Safauroa - I wish I had the answers.

I wish someone had started a new thread with a title similar and/or stating in part 'ASX FAILS to meet Court Order deadline of 25 Aug - how and why?'  Could've started with Sicilivian's post re his enquiry to the Fed Court re lack of ASX's lodgement and Fed Court informing that ASX had not requested an extension of time to lodge their defence....the thread could have also reiterated JK's tweet...etc etc
---
I have been wondering whether ASX's failure to lodge is (1) a  deliberate delaying tactic on behalf of ASX...however I do not understand why/and how is ASX permitted to not adhere to, OR COMPLY WITH, the court ordered timelines. They, ASX, expect when they themselves order documents by certain deadlines from ASX listed companies, that those deadlines have to be met.

Next Fed Court adherence timeline - 8 September is this upcoming Tuesday.  ISX do not have a chance to review the defence given nothing has been filed to date.



Then (2)
The fact that ASX is not adhering to the court order timelines is a perplexing issue as it raises many more questions: e.g.
-  does ASX not have a defence document?  If you read Justice Davies comments on the wording of ASX's initial SOR statement - the Federal Court will not allow the ASX to produce any document or claim against ISX unless it contains factual statements based on evidence----and not based on MISGUIDANCE*, opinion etc etc*;

- we know the ASX euphemistically worded claims and beliefs as stated in their SOR have not, and are not supported by the investigation/audit results of Clayton Utz's Independent Report - a report ASX insisted upon as 1 of 4 conditions for ISX to be relisted since a previous Fed Court appearance;

-  we also know that ASX has contacted Clayton Utz on/around 14 August as many of us viewed Kevin Lewis's email to C/Utz as ASX did not wish to accept the independent report findings as it exonerated ISX and made false the claims against ISX by ASX.*

Plus Kevin Lewis was wanting to inform C/Utz that he/they-ASX believed that ISX had committed a further 2 breaches - one being not giving ASX the names/details/personal information of shareholders who had voted for Resolutions 6/7.  Does ASX have the right to ask for that information?  Why do ASX need that information?

Protection of data, privacy issues are sources of great concern given ASX's possession of Visa data - one of many allegations against ASX at present for leaking data/information that wasn't their's to share.  Don't forget 9EC's media publications stating that they had been provided emails and also JK has claimed in his statement to the Federal Court, that ASX had leaked information to a short seller.

So much more I could say/state here - have denoted by *....but if I add more I risk this post being deleted, although all I would be stating is everything we have discussed/posted in the past on this forum and what we have ascertained from reading court documents, results of past Senate Inquiries, recent news re present Senate Inquiries etc etc.....

___

I certainly don't care about the reputational damage and national/international consequences of a Royal Commission inquiry into the ASX because ASX is the party doing themselves the most damage ---and--- unfortunately their actions, lack of objectivity and lack of procedural fairness, lack of operational insight and transparency within their own corporate entity....ETC ETC ETC*----is what would be causing greater harm to our nation.  The 4 banks survived a RC.  As has Australia.

There are no doubt many ASX listed companies------and exponentially a larger number of shareholders, who do not have or cannot afford the same level of insurance cover that ASX has {which covers ASX employees/individuals who make allegations/take actions against others}. There is an interesting article in The Australian today for those who can view - subject to copyright - law/insurance/ASX companies etc.

Many ASX listed companies and their shareholders cannot afford the same level of insurance cover/indemnity that ASX can afford.

Hence this may also be another contributing factor to explain why ASX  is demonstrating complacency and arrogance in relation to: (a) the Federal Court Orders, and in (b) response to a few recent statements made by Senators and (c) in ASX's statement to ASIC re ISX's claim for damages ----------and we could add many more points here...up to [z] possibly.   
------
ASX - the last bastion of....what/who/in Australia--------those we've been trying to protect ourselves from during decades of similar type Royal Commissions into ---???----not sure what words I would be allowed here, hence the asterixes....***

Any asterix appearing above * denoting where more could be added from various other sources and also supported by evidence.