Good Oil, with yesterday's US$33 million summary judgment in favour of XST, plus an order for the 3 Defendants to also pay XST's costs, I'm reminding you of earlier posts between us on 6 October:
In my post 27725256 I said, among other things (now in bold, for emphasis):
"The costs of a Supreme Court action are … well and truly worth it for a listed company with a good case for a multi-million dollar claim, as XST considers it has here ...
"Furthermore, the costs of a summary judgment application as XST has made here are… "trivial" - compared to a worthwhile prize. $ millions are clearly worth chasing hard…"
"Judges take a dim view of parties without a substantive case trying to drag things out in the hope that the other side will give up their good case..."
"Finally, don't forget that unsuccessful parties typically end up paying not only their own costs but also the costs of the successful party. That can hurt, and is a good disincentive to trying to game the system."
By contrast, in your post 27725505 you said, among other things (now in bold, for emphasis):
"…Far be it from XST to be seeking to recover '$25m'. or indeed having any hope whatsoever at the 'instant cash' so often spruiked on this forum. XST is clearly (now) seeking 'damages'.... tell me, what is their loss? A judge must be convinced there is a loss, and I, for the life of me, cannot see any meaningful loss..... $millions of prize you say,, prove it!"
"…I doubt XST will get thru with Summary Judgement, and even if they did, they still have to 'enforce'..... easier said than done.... and at what cost? Rastus is correct, flaming him without a proper argument shows your colors ....or extreme naivety.... "
Recovery action will now proceed, but in the meantime - having incorrectly called the outcome of the Summary Judgment and unwisely accused me of naivety when you obviously don't know my background - I hope you'll be more circumspect with your comments in future.
(p.s. I'm not a Holder at the moment but the box carried forward from last time)