Dear Gard's...This may well be the case........example.1..If...

Dear Gard's...This may well be the case........
example.1..
If Geoff misappropriates $100,000 from a coy he works for and then buys a house for $400,000 (ie 300k his contribution)....Naturally he could'nt have funded purchase without coys 100k...3 years later misuse of coys funds is discovered and house now valued at $800,000..the typical ct award would be that the house be sold and each would get back monies in proportion as to purchase ie coy gets 200k (this is a simplified example, obviously there could be criminal charges also)....
example 2
as above except geoff gives (loans) the money to his sister who knows nothing of where the money came from...The sister would have clean hands, the coy would still be entitled to get back the $100kplus interest etc but wouldnt have a claim on the profit in the house as in ct award above ...

Therefore
If judge believes mmx knew of dodgy funds (example 1 above)and we are talking something like 300,000 (chm themselves agree less than $400k!) this as a % of purchase of Jack hills something like 3%...Roughly accepted value of JH =800 mill...3% of that is approx 24 mill.....
OR if judge believes clean hands as in example 2, money back plus interest etc maybe $2 mil......
Or maybe not convinced fully one way or the other so maybe somewhere in between....either way its not going to add up to anything like 50 or a hundred million...