City: Baring all
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Surely this is not yet another instance of Trafalgar House, the construction and property group, misleading its shareholders - not to mention the underwriters of its present pounds 211m rights issue? Many Trafalgar House investors believe that in recent years they have repeatedly had the wool pulled over their eyes, that the company's true financial position has in reality been far worse than it looked on paper.
All that should have changed with the decision to launch what amounts to a distress rights issue. Shareholders are entitled to think that the rights circular is a 'bare all' document, that for the first time in a long time they have been put fully in the picture. A pretty unedifying one it is too except for one thing that should have brought at least some relief. There are, the document says, 'no legal or arbitration proceedings pending or threatened against the company'. But hold on a moment. I thought there were.
It is well known that a group of former Davy shareholders are planning to sue Trafalgar for the pounds 54m they believe they are still owed. Trafalgar also knows that the Davy shareholders have been advised by leading counsel that they have a good case. If this isn't threatened litigation I don't know what is. Furthermore, Trafalgar plainly thinks it's a threat too. A note tacked on to the bottom of the underwriting agreement, available for inspection at the offices of Ashurst Morris Crisp in the City, reveals that, in the event of Trafalgar being sued by former Davy shareholders, sub-underwriters would still have to stand by their obligations. Oh dear.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments