Copperhead, its just my interpretation of having read the...

Copperhead, its just my interpretation of having read the 'Agreed Statement of Facts' (ASF) within the judgement.

It is specifically noted that GDA Corporate provided a 'professional service' to Pdy and in reading the extent of that 'professional service' in the ASF, it appears to me that Pdy's D&O insurer COULD possibly pursue some sort of recovery action against GDA, targeting their Professional Indemnity policy for POTENTIAL breaches of Professional Duty.

Any potential action would be against the entity (and therefore its PI policy), not the directors specifically, simply because the POTENTIAL breach would be for professional duty, not the specific actions of directors (as it was against Pdy).

Whether the Pdy D&O insurer would be successful is another matter (and how much they could recover is another) - they may take the view it would be like throwing good money after bad.....

Regardless, IF it was to happen, it would be behind the scene and won't impact Pdy into the future.

All IMO, of course.