As a member of the "old guard" (twaaviator) I retain a small, but substantial holding in this company. I am wondering if the court rules in favor of SIGA regarding "damages". How and Who would determine the "new amount" to be awarded to PIP, and what would be the timeline for the final determination?
Thank you Mush and Kage for your replies (shades of old board postings, where there were substantive and considered responses) $10M max would mean the street would be able to factor in real costs and establish a realistic price for SIGA . I wonder, also, if news of any foreign sales and any pipeline developments are being sequestered until after the pronouncement by the Delaware Supreme Court?
Don't worry about a new timeline if the case were to be remanded to Chancery for a different damage assessment. There's ZERO chance of that happening. This judgment will be confirmed in full by the Delaware Supreme Court. I suggest everyone start getting used to it.
Hey Aviator. What Judge Farnan said was a likely outcome was that the case would be remanded back to Parsons' court with instructions to evaluate Reliance Damages. As I understand it (no expert), both sides would present their version of what SIGA would pay, and Parsons would decide. But their are marked limitations to what are considered Reliance Damages -- they are how much PIP was actually out of pocket based on their relying on their "agreement" with SIGA. Since the loan was paid back with interest, the main damage would be legal fees. I think $5 million might be a good guess. Certainly no more than $10 million. Of course the market would realize immediately that Reliance Damages are far less than a tenth of what PIP was awarded by Parsons for this case alone, so the bump for SIGA would be substantial: they'd basically be getting half their earnings back. And if PIP has to go bankrupt before SIGA pays it, then they'd be paying nothing! (Okay, I know that part's not entirely likely to happen that swiftly, but I like to dream about it.)
But if you saying reliance damages are a) only related to the out of pocket money PIP is out; and b) SIGA paid back the loan with interest, then c) why would SIGA be responsible for legal fees of PIP suing to get what they already got?
One of the points made in oral arguments is that pip didn't present evidence at trial to support damages based on reliance. That means that PIP would need to present their case and SIGA would have an opportunity for rebuttal. Given the timeframes involved in the original case, it could be years before damages were decided if that portion of the case is remanded. I expect SIGA would pay court costs for the original suit and PIP the appeal and any subsequent costs to litigate reliance damages.