Ann: Phosphagenics Arbitration Award Issued, page-248

Now now P. No real need to be antagonistic is there?

Surely u have made ur points along the journey apparently and u would expect holders to fairly get annoyed when u continue your line of posting having already tried to help the "lemmings" as you call them. The other day was what...."intellectually challenged" if I recall. 

As per your last post, there is nothing more for you to do by your own admission then is there?

Your points proven, so is there really a need for your posts unless there is some other unthought of angle or agenda? 

As for corporations law, aware of that as well thank you and maybe you need to acquaint yourself more with the overlaps between the separate contracts (Listing & Business Rules) of the ASX and its listed companies and the role of ASIC & Corporations Law.

Yes they are intertwined and have overlapping powers, requirements to be adhered to and are not mutually exclusive however, there are various provisions around how they are enacted and enforced and at what points. 

If you wished to support your post, may I suggest providing references or links outlining and evidencing your argument rather than throw away lines and bland statements expecting others to do the referencing and supporting of their counter argument. 

Anyway for the hell of it, please read and interpret item 2.7 paragraphs 1 & 2 primarily (link end of post) and if you consider that the costs award has not been handed down as yet, thereby making it an unknown potential liability I would suggest, rightly or wrongly, that it would be difficult to argue insolvency today as it stands as the potential debt is not yet known let alone incurred or even a date when it would be incurred, known. 

The company has cash in hand at this time, revenue, limited other liabilities having paid or provisioned for the tribunal and legal costs "already" incurred and technically would meet a going concern & ASX List Rules as at today imo. 

Obviously as we have all stated numerous times in agreement with you, that may change quickly once the final picture is known.

This post is about your statement veiled as a question about trading insolvent. (BTW...may pay to be mindful implying certain things about Directors of Companies. They tend not to like it if unfounded unless u know something the rest of us don't?) 

If you also read the last company Fin Report you will see comments regarding the going concern of the business as and when they were prepared and as to why the Accounting firm prepared the same at that time. 

So, whilst it started off quite well and I was happy to engage with you in a meaningful, and what I found at times, productive conversation, I now grow tired of your manner of posting so will leave u to it.

Have a good one P and try considering holders as other actual  people who may be hurting substantially without ur need to harass them about being lemmings & intellectually challenged irrespective of ur own perceived well meaning. All the best. 

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.bakermckenzie.com/-/media/files/locations/australia/bk_australia_dutiesliabilitiesofdirectors_dec17.pdf%3Fla%3Den&ved=2ahUKEwi1m9ic8eLeAhUYWX0KHYlPDrsQFjAOegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2uduQZ74-4mXrgvX3KU2Ji