Originally Posted by
Blackout
Mick,
Where did you come up with that unequivocally conclusion? Is it stated somewhere? The application for the Panel was not refused, it was withdrawn!
"The application concerned, among other things, whether certain circumstances regarding the process conducted by the Administrators of VAH were unacceptable and had the effect of precluding an alternative deed of company arrangement being presented to VAH’s creditors at the second creditors’ meeting (see
TP20/40). The Panel is satisfied that it is not against the public interest to consent to the applicants withdrawing their application.
The Panel will publish its reasons for the decision to consent to the withdrawal in due course on its website
The Takeovers Panel."
The Federal Court requested (cautioned) the Administration to give as much information as possible and yes, to provide notice in advance of any changes to current Deed.
They agreed on that as far as I am aware.
There is nothing that says otherwise, I posted that hearing for clarity. Did I miss something?
Blackout, I was never referring to the application to the Takeovers Panel, rather I was talking about the application to the Federal Court by two of the bondholders,
Broad Peak Investment and Tor, to gain access to the full details of the Bain bid. Justice Middleton refused the bondholders' application.
The matter that was being discussed was whether the bondholders had a right to information above and beyond what they would be entitled to as creditors. And the ruling was that they were not. They will get access to the same information as all the other creditors prior to the second creditors' meeting such that they can make informed and considered decisions at that meeting. Neither being a bondholder nor an unsuccessful bidder confers on Broad Peak Investment or Tor any special rights or privileges beyond that ordinarily conferred on them as creditors.
Separately, that application to the Takeovers Panel, frankly, was never likely to have even been heard by them. It was an attempt to work around the Federal Court ruling on the confidentiality of the Bain proposal. I suspect that when the Takeovers Panel publish their reasons, one of them will be that that matter was then currently before the Federal Court and applications for relief sought by the applicants was available through recourse to that Court.