Where a business deal and subsequent undertakings are vague, bad or stuffed up by both sides, the courts (rightly) don't see it as their role or priority to resolve the mess. That is why a very clear contract that states "no key activity will be undertaken by the contractor without specific client consent " is essential.
Who knows how much of the contract needs to be paid? I don't. Presumably some will have to be paid but Ikon's costs should have nothing to do with it. What is relevant is the length of rope provided by Cellmid to Ikon through the contract and whether some of Ikon's undertakings clearly fell outside of the contract scope.