|
Post by angelsrwatchn on Jun 8, 2013 10:29:33 GMT -5
www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=60d6a9a3-d1f3-4cc3-b66f-08270b962d57Interesting take on why no EQ but those reasons have changed I think now.....and I don't think the reason of it will cost more money is legal... I am quoting: www.mcmillan.ca/Files/BHarrison_EquityCommittee_1006.pdf ......"no one factor should outweigh another and ‘costs alone cannot and should not deprive public debt and security holders of representation’ as set out In re McLean Indus., Inc., 70 B.R. 852, 860 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1987). Although the solvency test is one of the most difficult to apply, it is one of the most commonly used reasons referred to when determining whether or not to ap- point a formal equity committee."
|
|