bmg litigation update, page-18

Interfc,

My understanding is the the JV agreement is between CAP and BMG. The proceedings are between the shareholders of BMG. CAP is not a party to the proceedings. I think this has been stated in past CAP announcements and they are not mentioned as a party to the proceedings or the Appeal on the ComCourts portal.

The Hawsons JV appears to be the major asset of BMG, and therefore features in the judgement as the value of BMG may be different depending on whether or not BMG default on the agreement.

From my review and understanding, I see no reason why the Court could make an order that would impact CAP's entitlements under the JV, such as their right to buy back the JV in the event of default by BMG.

My thoughts only, always do you own research.