Ann: Subscription Agreements Legal Update, page-47

makes you wonder what they actually have

clearly there has proof provided there was or is still funds available. clearly there is also absolutely no reason given that they dispute they owe the money, the claim is entirely based on that premise, that they firstly signed the binding agreement and that they defaulted

xstate only have had indications from the investors that they were, they will, and are going to pay through out and during the court processes since being served their summonses, they say they are trying to delay proceeding despite repeated representations that the subscription monies would be paid.

" Company is concerned that the defendants have continuously sought to find excuses to delay the progression of the Proceedings. This is despite repeated representations by the defendants that the subscription monies would be paid"

So how are you going to convince a judge you need time to defend a matter that you have been promising to settle?

I wish them luck..