Manolete Partn. Share Price (MANO)

You ask "Why does it matter to shareholders who the Auditors are?"

In this company of all companies it is more important to have independence of review of case values.

Were the departing auditors influenced in the choice of MANO because they had an idea of how their claim might be valued?

Just saying ....... that is why independence must never be compromised particularly as Creditors are nearly always worse off choosing MANO than other funding routes.

The interplay between IPs, "double-dipping" solicitors, Judges who openly say - in public - "we always try to favour IPs" is already under regulatory scrutiny, so MANO has to be like Caeser's wife and should never have even considered taking this case

I find your reaction bewildering, it’s just one of those things. On the (very) positive side, Manolete deem a case with a headline value of £15m has got such merits that they’re willing to change their trusted long-term auditor to persue. Why does it matter to shareholders who the Auditors are?

Shullbit!

MANO has behaved perfectly in the circs. These things happen in their chosen field.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. And nice to hear about a high value case.

Today's RNS is a disgrace.

Regulatory rules prohibit Auditors entering into such contracts with clients.

Full stop..no ifs ... no buts.

www.icaew.com/-/media/corporate/files/technical/ethics/icaew-guidance-identifying-and-managing-conflicts.ashx?la=en

So where was MANO's due diligence? AWOL?

MANO should never have accepted the contract in the first place. MANO's own lawyers are bound by Solicitors Regulation Authority Rules but seem to have ignored them.

Are MANO bound to hand back the deal? Time will tell.