PROVE IT!
Here's what the Alberta Appeal Panel stated in a decision on December 23, 2016
"The panel never ruled during the oral argument that the fresh evidence was admissible, and merely confirmed that it could be referred to. The fact that the evidence was subsequently ruled inadmissible is not inconsistent with permitting its use during the oral argument. As stated in Stolar at p. 487: " .. . there is a distinction between an order which actually admits the proffered evidence and one which allows consideration of the evidence for the purpose of determining whether it will be admitted".
"The request for release of the transcripts of the oral argument is accordingly refused."
This is NOT what shareholders in attendance in the courtroom remember.
The shareholders version is entirely different.
The easiest way for the Alberta Court of Appeal to settle this matter would be to release the transcript to avoid all appearances of impropriety.
But, they won't.
Conclusion: There must be some impropriety!
