tburns is quite right, this has been thoroughly considered. The difference is that were the SOA terminated by insolvency, then the RA becomes 'the only show in town'.
PIs can apply to the RA to join the RA action, or bring their own action (although this would be both difficult and financially problematical), but there are certain non-PI claimants that have indicated they are not willing to sue on their own. Only through the SOA.
Therefore under a liquidation, the number of claimants is certainly likely to be reduced, in which case the % distribution is far higher. So you see, liquidation would actually benefit the RA and as R33 stated, it moves us up the que.
The company has no defence to the claim, as they admitted to the court that they were formed for a fraud. Consequently, although the company would need to go to proceedings to establish their claim against their defendants, the RA's defendants consist of just Rybak, Regli and the company. So a summary judgement (against the company) is not only possible, but extremely likely.
The SOA automatically makes the RA shareholders creditors of the company and the management is obliged to defer sufficient resources ( in other words 100% of the claim) to meet their claim before the SOA members receive any distribution. So you see, the SOA actually indicates that the company is putting aside 100% of the creditors claim, which of course the court would award, as the RA claim is legitimate.
This is all in the public domain, but it appears to have escaped the majority of the Scheme members attention.
Langbar Int stock quotes
Langbar Int stock charts
Follow this thread
