Thank you for pointing it out, I missed that, but did not miss it in the letter:

"1 am compelled to write this letter for two reasons: firstly, because of my long-standing concern that the Company's shareholders' rights have been and continue tobe inadequately protected. The reason for this being, as disclosed in my letter to Judge Stark at the U.S. District Court of Delaware (Case 1:17-mc-00151-LPS, Document 134 Filed 02/25/19), the unprecedented conflict of interest that involves four of the five members of the Company's Board of Directors (the lnterested Directors).

Secondly, this concern was recently exacerbated by a communication dated April 6, 2020 from Mr.Nicholas Kluge from Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP, as Counsel for the Shareholder's Committee, that indicated that "Our firm resigned our retainer in a meeting of the shareholder's committee that took place in January, 2019, and no langer acts for any party in any capacity in any proceedings relating to Crystallex.". This, together with the absence of Mr. Lau Brzezinski from Blaney McMurtry LLP, means that the Company's shareholders have no true and effective legal representation to protect their collective interests in the CCAA proceedings."

Makes me wonder whether we ever had any "true and effective legal representation" to begin with given Gowlings did not attempt to protect shareholders' legacy assets like the mining data and the tax loss carry forward benefits, or am I wrong in my assumption?

"The illegality of the Agreement as a result of the breaches of Common and Statutory Law makes it unenforceable and compels the CCAA Court, the Company, Tenor, the Monitor or other interested parties to declare it void, given the basic and fundamental elements at issue and its significance to the overall Agreement."

The Agreement reflects other breaches of law whose discussion is better left for another more opportune occasion."

Is it the judges responsibility to recognize this or do we need to get "true and effective legal representation" going forward now that the shareholder committee only acts in their own best interests?