"Im so impressed you new the answer to a question you asked, bit bizarre. Would be a debatable piece of work if push come to shove and challenged in a court without the right docs i would imagine. you must be very clever, 5 years uni and 10 years lawyer experience and all.. . Anyways , Oh! as an aside i had a few seconds spare, just reviewed your post interpretation and understanding of the Cleansing Pospects intellectual debate/conversation : ) hmmm Maybe an exta year at university would of been good for ya methinks."
It's actually not debatable at all in court. What I posted in relation to your nonsensical post about an agreement being unenforceable is actually consistent with the current common law position. You do remember what you said, don't you?
"Oh , so it's just an agreement, not a legal binding type contract ? does that mean no legal breach by either party is/was possible i spose. Can a/the agreement simply be switched on or off at any given point in time ?"
I've also reviewed each of our posts regarding the cleansing prospectus issue and I note that it took about 5 different people to attempt to decipher what you were actually trying to say as you were totally incapable of answering a simple question. You then go on to continue to attempt to scaremonger that another CR is going to happen before 23//4/19 because of the cleansing prospectus. I simply pointed out the explicit purpose for the cleansing prospectus as stated by the company in the document itself and what the company itself explicitly stated the cleansing prospectus was not intended to be doing (i.e not to raise capital). Your clear assertion was that the cleansing prospectus was issued for the purpose of doing a backdoor CR in a few months, when the likely reason for the timeframe was to allow for a further EGM to be called if the key items required to get shares issued to settle the A-K acquisition didn't get up at the EGM that was taking place after 21/1/19.
As an aside - *'I'm' not 'Im', *'push came' not 'push come', *'Prospectus' not 'Pospects', *'extra' not 'exta', *'would have' not 'would of', *'you' not 'ya', *'I think' not 'methinks'.
VEC Price at posting:
1.2¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held