Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

iSIGN Media Solutions Inc V.ISD.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  ISDSF

iSIGN Media Solutions Inc. is a Canada-based infrastructure-focused, software as a service (SaaS) company. The Company is engaged in providing proximity-centric location services. It specializes in the areas of location-based security alert messaging and proximity marketing utilizing Bluetooth and Wi-Fi connectivity in complete privacy. The Company’s licensed PHACT technology, an intelligent smart space analytics platform utilizes publicly available anonymous interactions between mobile devices to determine occupancy levels and movements of individuals. The PHACT technology is housed in hardware units called Hybrid Analytics Location Observation (HALO) a software platform and listening device that provides a suite of functions specifically designed to maximize safety and security within a managed environment, such as a school, hospital, sopping plaza or concert venue; and Hybrid Analytics Location Observation with object recognition (HALOfx).


TSXV:ISD.H - Post by User

Post by gltaisignlongson Jun 04, 2021 5:57pm
294 Views
Post# 33334705

New blood indeed...

New blood indeed...here is another view at Creekside vs Phillips

https://www.mlflitigation.com/media/shareholders-agreement-helps-founder-obtain-oppression-remedy/

The oppression remedy protects individuals with an interest in a corporation from corporate actions that are harmful by protecting their reasonable expectations. If a claimant can show unfair conduct by a corporation resulting in prejudice to their interests, the oppression remedy enables a court to intervene.

...
Justice Gilmore found that Creekside sought to suspend Phillips from all his positions including his role as Director. That alone would have met the test for oppression, which was bolstered by allowing another employee to hold himself out as President and hiring a General Counsel without Phillips’s consent.
...

The Court determined that Creekside used its leverage as the sole funding source behind AP1 to attempt to gain concessions from Phillips, such as selling his shares to Creekside at cost and resigning as President, CEO, and Director under the Memorandum of Understanding. These actions were contrary to the USA and demonstrated Creekside’s objective of ousting Phillips without regard to the terms of the agreements the parties had signed. Justice Gilmore also inferred that the timing of these actions was connected to AP1 being close to earning large profits and Phillips being an obstacle to Creekside’s future plans for AP1.
.....
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>