This is a VERY good summary. Up until now, the scoop has been that if K gets 90% and goes to court to force acquisition of remaining ARU shares, the shareholders can make representations to the judge that a higher price is warranted. This seems to be plausible for without this possibility, what is the point of a court hearing? The forcing would appear to be a cut and dried matter at that stage, if no increase in price can be sought.

Could you confirm that your literal wording is the law, or is it possible we could still petition for a higher price, with justification provided, of course? This is of some significance, I believe.

Best regards, Orange Flash