SML - Synlait Milk Ltd

[minimoke]

..........

[Beagle]

Hugely big pink font - must be an important announcement to be taken seriously.

Now waiting for the counter injunction.

(Edit - obvious a practical solution was not achievable)

Yes quite right. The size of the pink font speaks VAST volumes about the company and its culture. Not at any price...

[Leftfield]

....Edit - somewhere in the documents (I'll try to reference it) there is a clause that says STL are liable for all costs in freeing up covenants. The loser of a case is usually liable for costs of both parties but that clause may trump that practice.

I also read this at some stage??? I recall reading that SML's purchase of Pokeno was conditional on the vendor removing the covenants and that if they didn't then the vendor was liable for all costs incurred by SML?

This would explain why SML has proceeded to build etc.

Anyway the Supreme Court will now decide (if the hearing is in Wellington I might attend as it could be interesting entertainment value!)

[minimoke]

..........

[pg0220]

Now with the China has proposed a new plan regarding their IF market, wouldn't court be looking at an intention of Mr Ye acquiring the land, enjoy the covenants to prevent the competitor extending the manufacturing capacity, then later remove the covenants for himself for business? Also I think SML's movement might be right so that they can show that they are willing to escalate the matter and may be in a better position to settle the matter. I remember FPH and RMD in a patent dispute and how they counter sued each other - I know this is in a quite different perspective though.

[minimoke]

..........

[nzsharetrade]

Now with the China has proposed a new plan regarding their IF market, wouldn't court be looking at an intention of Mr Ye acquiring the land, enjoy the covenants to prevent the competitor extending the manufacturing capacity, then later remove the covenants for himself for business? Also I think SML's movement might be right so that they can show that they are willing to escalate the matter and may be in a better position to settle the matter. I remember FPH and RMD in a patent dispute and how they counter sued each other - I know this is in a quite different perspective though.

I was hoping court can see this is not a normal case. there is a cost for anyone muck around dairy industry in NZ.

[minimoke]

..........

[sb9]

Now with the China has proposed a new plan regarding their IF market, wouldn't court be looking at an intention of Mr Ye acquiring the land, enjoy the covenants to prevent the competitor extending the manufacturing capacity, then later remove the covenants for himself for business? Also I think SML's movement might be right so that they can show that they are willing to escalate the matter and may be in a better position to settle the matter.

From that angle, I think SML has got a good point to prove and have the decision turned in their favour.

[pg0220]

That is a very high risk tactic. What if NZIPL seek and are granted an injunction forcing SML to cease all work until the matter is resolved through the courts - which could be a year away.

I think SML has already talked to Mr Ye and tried to find a practical solution, then found that he is so stubborn that settling the matter may not be possible. In that case, SML bringing the case up to the Supreme court might be the last practical solution for them. Also unless Mr Ye has purchased the land and doesn't want to settle the matter for the other reason which in case SML will anyway need to abandon the factory, they may be able to come to the practical solution before the Supreme court decision.

It is risky, but SML doesn't seem to have many options available now.