Unless I am missing something, we are only accused by allegations from management, not charged. We know these allegations to be false, and I believe easy to be proven as false, but the onus would be on the plaintiff to prove that the allegations are true without reasonable doubt. There is no merit to her claims or the case, so dont worry, these allegations are designed as a SLAPP suit and is easy to see by any judge that they are just that, in which lawyers to a degree cannot even take clients on sometimes when this is blatantly obvious. I am totally surprised that any lawyers took up her case at all. For managements call against shareholders as conspiring, there is a process accepted by the Exchange and regulators for disgruntled shareholders to be followed, if this was a conspiricy, her qualms are not with the shareholders at all, but with the regulations that allowed this process to happen. And if management were to pursue legal action against the authorities, it would defy the protection that is supposedly in place for shareholders. So, totally ludicrous, I agree.

Instead of attacking legislation, management chose to attack shareholders in this manner, perhaps management think that the shareholders would be the easiest to pin blame on? The only process by which shareholders have to try to protect and ensure their rights in a public traded company has been followed, when this instrument is taken away, there is no security nor provisions left to uphold integrity in this Venture exchange for investors. If the Judge today rules mostly in favour of management, this could be considered a death knell for the Venture exchange, taking the last smidgen of integrity out of an already beat up market. I dont see that happening.

IMO