What I do not quite comprehend is the CAA action. As I understand it the CAA suspended the Monarch AOC thus 'leaving' the slots with Monarch/KPMG. TTR84 is correct in that the 80% rule therefore applies even though the AOC is suspended and this is no doubt the argument the KPMG barrister will refer to in Court. If KPMG/Greybull Capital 'win' (which I suspect they will on legal technicality) the slot value will revert to KPMG and subsequently Greybull Capital whereas if they were to revert to Airport Coordination they would benefit.
I do not know where the proceeds of any slot value Airport Coordination realise goes to (?) however unlikely to go in Greybull's direction and surely the thoughts of this forum is that the money should be used to cover repatriation (taxpayer) costs, staff redundancies and pension shortfalls.
I fail to understand therefore why the CAA did not just revoke the Monarch AOC as surely it was very very unlikely someone would step in and buy Monarch as a 'going concern' thus their need for an AOC. If the CAA had revoked the licence rather than suspend then perhaps the slot sale wouldn't seem to be tilting in Greybull's favour.
Just my opinion and would appreciate comment from those who understand better than I.