you are confused muzz constructive trust related to chm actually being awarded a stake in the jack hills project,which as you point out was dismissed.instead the judge awarded chm,the VALUE of the 25% stake in jack hills project,less expenditure.go back and read the judges ruling.it states this clearly,and this was what chm asked for if it couldnt get a direct stake in jack hills.
you are confused muzz constructive trust related to chm actually...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 13 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
