bmh you know exactly what I mean by saying that all decisions are made by the court but maybe I can put it in terms that are easier to follow. The only place to change what has happened is in court and to claim that the court erred. Gowling tried this and failed. End of story.

But maybe what you are saying is that Fung and Tenor did what was best for themselves. And somehow that is a surprise? Or relevant?

Shareholders were not in the dark when Tenor was granted 35% for $36m, nor when each subsequent DIP round was approved by the court (and it was obvious more of the NAP was being given up). You can feign ignorance but the court doesn't buy it. Rule 37.14 requires objections to be raised forthwith, shareholders did not do this and only after a sizeable award was made did they find a voice (and an "ambulance chasing" lawyer). Greed will do that.