Requisitioners go to Court of Session - Adjourned until 14th

[forlanssister 3,050]

Seems clear enough to me at least.

 

The Petitioners sought interim orders to prevent the Annual General Meeting of the Company from taking place on 24 October 2013. No such orders were granted by the court.

 

Certain legal arguments in relation to the validity of the section 338 notices have been continued to a new hearing to take place on Monday 14 October 2013 at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. Whilst the Company considers its legal position on these matters to be robust, the Petitioners have also confirmed that if their arguments succeed in relation to the validity of the s338 notices, the Petitioners agree that the Annual General Meeting should proceed to take place on 24 October 2013 as long as their proposed resolutions are circulated as soon as reasonably practicable after the hearing concludes and before the date of the Annual General Meeting. The Annual General Meeting of the Company is, therefore, set to proceed on 24 October 2013.

 

Hard to read that statement without getting dizzy.

[crucible 0]

The board & their PR rat Toxic Jack are trying to make a big deal out of the fact that their offer to have a meeting wasn't taken up. The fact of the matter is that most of us who've been following these events for the past 2 months know fine well that it's gone way past the point of meeting Mather & co for a chin-wag about proposals.

 

The board has allowed very little room for negotiation, while blocking and stalling continuously throughout this saga. It took the imposters on our Club's current board 4 weeks to start questioning the validity of McColl & co's Requisition, then when they received everything they had asked for, the dirty chancers got Strand Hanson to veto and block it. That's the same Strand Hanson who were working as the companies' AIM Nominated Advisor until a few days ago.

 

Why did our 2nd Nominated Advisor in only 3 months (they only just took over from Cenkos in July) decide to withdraw their services? Did the chancers running our club tell them to veto a legal requisition? Genuine question.

 

Sorry can't answer things that I have no knowledge of, but the statement regarding today's subject looks crystal clear to me, the petitioners failed in their aim.

[Zappa 0]

It's on McMurdo's blog.

 

It's embarrassing that people from the Club and Jack Irvine have been feeding poor Bill with so much crap in recent times. Totally embarrassing. Bill's probably getting embarrassed about it all himself.

[Zappa 0]

Sorry can't answer things that I have no knowledge of, but the statement regarding today's subject looks crystal clear to me, the petitioners failed in their aim.

 

They haven't failed in anything no matter how you try to spin it. The hearing was simply adjourned because the board are stalling (AGAIN!!) the proceedings by (yet again!) questioning the validity of a proposal.

 

The board's stall tactics are crystal clear because they're getting old and their PR minions' spin is getting more obvious and easier to spot by the day.

[crucible 0]

I really don't need to or desire to spin anything no order to suspend or delay the meeting was granted, that is crystal clear, you of course are free to read it otherwise if you wish.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

What has been conceded, nothing that I can see looks like a waste of money and everyone's time, the order sought by Keen QC to postpone wasn't granted.in fact nothing was granted.

 

We shal see what happens at the agm then we can decide if this failed or not.

 

 

My bet is the vote on p murray etc will happen.

 

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4

[forlanssister 3,050]

I really don't need to or desire to spin anything no order to suspend or delay the meeting was granted, that is crystal clear, you of course are free to read it otherwise if you wish.

 

I don't doubt it will go ahead but with the requisitioners names on the ballot papers and that is against the wishes of the board and something they failed to ensure today in court, if you see that as some sort of victory then you're getting desperate.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

It would be a severe stretch for anyone to claim victory here. Desperate in fact.

 

 

Will the board recompense the club for wasted costs if they lose this case?

 

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 4