David
I'm really pleased that David Gubbay has jumped into the TEN action.
Insisting that Justice Black erred in the Nexus judgment is the best tactic[[by not observing the stated intention of the legislature]] ..and one that can give rise to a share holder funded appeal
The first amendment, by itself, will not allow a DOCA administrator to transfer shares without reference to the shareholders or the Court, but it will empower the Court to order compulsory transfer. The Court will be required to be "satisfied that the transfer would not unfairly prejudice the interests of the members of the company". According to the Explanatory Memorandum, this is "intended to direct the Court to consider the impact of a compulsory sale of shareholders [sic!] where there may be some residual value in the company" (para 7.58). It is unclear what "some residual value" means in this context. The Explanatory Memorandum also says that "a deed that involves creditors swapping their debt for equity in the company may unfairly advantage creditors if the underlying business of the company is strong" (para 7.55): this suggests that "some residual value" should be read as meaning more than a de minimis value.
TEN Price at posting:
16.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
