Originally Posted by
Lead Balloon
No Mick. "Unequivocally" was unequivocally the wrong adverb to use. Middleton J effectively said to the parties: Go away and sort this information sharing issue out, or I will.
However, I know where my money would be, if I were silly enough to bet out the eventual outcome.
The matter that was being addressed was whether the bondholders, either as a special group of creditors or as unsuccessful bidders, have some special entitlement to access information that is restricted by a court order. Sunfish was of the opinion that bondholders have a right to dissect the full and complete details of the sale agreement. That particular matter was resolved - unequivocally. They do not have that entitlement.
In terms of there being any doubt as to the court's ruling against the applicants, was there any? The application was refused, with costs, save paragraph 5 which simply related to the provision of notice of any further applications to the Court.