Much of what the substance complaint against VMS is flatly denied by VMS.  Further, VMS has demanded strict proof of Dunlop's various claims.  If Dunlop will not come out of the weeds and be specific, what option does VMS have beyond waiting for due process to play out?


Dunlop seems to be relying on various alleged verbal agreements and understandings as the basis of the claim against VMS, despite the fact that the agreement is written and specifically states that the entire agreement is contained in the written agreement.  


The question will be what the agreement between the two parties is.   The agreement is written for good reason--to prove what the two parties intended.  Should really be a simple matter of convincing a judge to simply read the agreement and enforce it.  VMS is not the one who has to prove things--Dunlop (as the party that is apparently trying to remake the agreement) is.  Don't see how this will get off the ground for Dunlop...unless the entire intent of the suit is to depress share price.