Member Info for Chaebol

* Urgency: If the underlying case has an impending trial date, the Supreme Court of Singapore can expedite the appeal, resolving it in less than 2 months.

* Complexity: If the legal issues require extensive review, the Judge may reserve judgment, pushing the final decision closer to the 4-month mark.

An appeal on a stay in Singapore in front of a Judge takes 2 to 4 months

The time spent waiting for the appeal is only a true delay mechanism if the defendants secure a Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal.

Lets see the filings in the next couple of weeks, will GST announce anything on the 9th lol or the 4th

If Zheng Zhu playing delays lol we should expect appeals filed soon and the a Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal staying the high court action.

3. Broader Disclosure Concerns

Shareholders continue to await timely and meaningful updates on several other key strategic initiatives that have been previously highlighted to the market, including

* Progress on the GS Money / GS Fintech stablecoin and cross-border payments platform.

* The current status of the Group’s European payment and crypto operations, particularly following the challenges experienced in the Baltic region.

Specifically, the market has received virtually no meaningful updates since late 2025 regarding the Group’s European regulatory strategy. This includes the engagement of legal advisors from October 2024, the initial application to the Bank of Lithuania, the subsequent shift to Poland via Finferno, and the operational status of Bake and GS20 Exchange.

Despite earlier guidance that Bake would re-apply under the GS Fintech UAB banner in Q1 2026, followed by statements regarding a Polish application, there has been no further disclosure. This is particularly relevant as the Finferno licence is due to expire at the end of June 2026, and Poland has not yet fully implemented MiCA regulations. Both Bake and GS20 Exchange currently are non-operative, leaving shareholders with no visibility on the Group’s revised European strategy or timeline for compliance and reactivation.

The cumulative effect of these delayed or absent updates is that retail investors are operating without a clear understanding of the current status and prospects of several core fintech pillars.

Requested Actions

I kindly ask the FCA to

1. Review whether GSTechnologies’ handling and timing of the Semnet High Court litigation disclosures (particularly the delay from early April activity until RNS 1 June 2026) complies with its obligations under UK MAR Article 17.

2. Examine trading activity in GST shares between 8 May and 29 May 2026 for any irregular patterns.

3. Encourage the Company to provide clearer, more timely, and informative disclosures to the market regarding both the Semnet litigation and the status of its key European fintech and payment operations (including GS Fintech UAB, Bake, Finferno, and related licences).

I am happy to provide additional supporting information if required.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

2. Unusual Trading Activity During the Period of Non-Disclosure

The prolonged silence, particularly between 8 May and 29 May 2026 (spanning the substantive stay hearing, the delivery of the Court’s decision, and the immediate post-verdict period), coincided with notable and anomalous trading characteristics in GST shares.

This activity was marked by

* Repeated volume spikes without any public news or corporate announcements.

* Clusters of numerous small trades (SINT’s), which frequently pushed the price up to the highest bid level.

* These small trades were consistently followed by significantly larger sell orders being printed, after which tiny proprietary or prop buys appeared to provide apparent support.

This repetitive pattern occurred while the market had no official information regarding the material Singapore High Court proceedings. Such characteristics can create the illusion of genuine buying interest and liquidity, while potentially masking underlying sell pressure and distorting natural price discovery for retail investors.

As discussed, I respectfully request that the Market Surveillance team undertake a detailed examination of the full order book, time-and-sales data, and participant flows for GST shares during this period.

1/3

therese.chambers@fca.org.uk

CC

market.abuse@fca.org.uk

sarahowenmp@parliament.uk

Dear,

Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning and for the clarity provided. This is twice now I have faced an RNS from GST whilst making a complaint to you. However as discussed this is much greater than simple news avoidance.

As agreed, please find attached detailed trading data for GST shares covering the period from 8 May 2026 to midday 1 June 2026. I have highlighted the anomalies.

So in reflecting on the RNS this morning, that is imprecise, I am writing to raise concerns regarding the Company’s disclosure practices, specifically the timeliness and quality of updates relating to material litigation, and the potential impact on market transparency.

1. Significant Delay in Disclosing Material Litigation Developments

On 13 February 2026, GSTechnologies announced via RNS that its subsidiary, Semnet Pte Ltd, had commenced High Court proceedings in Singapore seeking approximately US$4.2 million in damages (HC/OC 143/2026).

However, the Company did not provide any further updates on the progress of this significant claim for nearly four months. Key procedural developments that were not disclosed in a timely manner include

* Active case proceedings in chambers commenced on 2 April 2026.

* A substantive hearing on the Defendants’ stay applications (HC/SUM 1210/2026 and HC/SUM 1211/2026) was held on 14 May 2026.

* The Singapore High Court delivered its decision on the stay applications via virtual hearing on 26 May 2026, dismissing both applications.

It was not until 1 June 2026 that the Company issued an RNS confirming the outcome. This announcement was extremely brief, contained imprecise dating (referring only to 26 May), and offered shareholders almost no context or explanation of the procedural timeline or implications. The extended delay between substantive court activity (beginning 2 April) and public disclosure raises legitimate questions regarding compliance with the Company’s obligations for timely disclosure of inside information under Article 17 of the UK Market Abuse Regulation.

Lol you have won the venue not the case.

YOu lot have said Zheng Zhu have been buying these shares back since first week of Jan when they ramped the semnet settlement.

This game has ages to play. Lets see if they appeal x;) another month. Defence filed September October with counter claims its got lots of windy roads to go yet !

So is Ferhat Enki, and all the staff GS Fintech staff.

They say its a tough market out there....... makes her tier 1 legal rep even more shocking lol

Lol a procedure win on venue is now telling you settling is imminent lol.

This game hasn't even started yet.

You told me the they couldnt even file a stay so dont be getting self righteous here BFD

For months you told me wheres the counter claims not understanding that stays prevent you from filing counter claims, they don't stop them now BFD but dont worry ill post the hearing files and what they mean for you.

Bfdinvestor

Posted in: GST

Posts: 11,435

RE: Legals

20 Feb 2026 13:32

And again more of the make believe Chaebol.

The two defendants walked away from the agreement, so there is no SIAC for the high court to intervene in.

3 months later the high court dismisses the stays lol how did they intervene if they cant.

And you want me to show contrition lol

Lol if we do that Ray can we discuss this not going under 1.9p

I said in previous posts if GST get it dismissed its a win for GST. It was ion their interests to RNS you actually told me they wont RNS as its not a change of venue but we are all trying to predict futures and laws, its not easy. GST RNS today is more confusing for normal investors if anything. They should have RNS'd from the 2nd April hearing, that court started etc.

With the state of that RNS, I dont understand why they didn't RNS on Tuesday or even explain these cases were happening as not all investors can source this info.

Why dont you ask AI Ray what the differences are.

Its obvious it would have been bad news for GST to go back to arb are you disputing that?

More delay's and a rushed lazy imprecise RNS from GST.

What have you won ?

The place of venue, that is it.

What that ive explained the hearings and their meanings since the case started from April 2nd ?

I called the stay hearing to be upheld as extremely likely and I was wrong, oh well. At least I gaev a fair assesment of all the hearings theire meanings and we were due an RNS im glad thats finally hit, its a very vague RNS lol and incorrect.

GST have only won procedure 26th no merits. The real battle has not even begun.

People told me up to last week how do i know what the hearings are and how can they stay for arbitration when theyve already rejected arbitration lol Zheng Zhu lost precedure, they have not lost on merits of the claims. Wong tu clan showed the claims exist outside of the spa not the wrongdoing of them. That is it.

The RNS is a rushed lazy job and not very precise they actually heard the stay hearings on the 14th May and the justice gave her verdict on the 26th. They didnt even tell you the case had begun and people ttold me they dont need to rns because the venue hasnt changed etc, Im just glad GST rns'd even if it was a very poor rushed RNS.

The RNS also explains that the OC hearing will be held on 4 June 2026 for the Court to give the defence a direction for their case. not withstanding appeals This part means that Zheng Zhu and Chong have not filed a defence and they will be given around 3-6 weeks to file this, depending on complexity. With the summer coming in Singapore and the summer breaks a defence could be filed and acknowledged as late September and thats not adding potential counter claims and other filings that Zheng Zhu Chong have the ability to do.

If the lawyers are playing delay delay delay which I said would be an obvious strategy all those months ago then they are doing a fine job, in the best case scenario you could have Zheng Zhu defence in August, thats 6 months after the writ....

So going all the way in this case could easily see lat 2027 2028 after appeals.

GST will need money for this case no doubt, so lets see all the good news they owe us on all the pillars.

Surely a corporate update is due !

Depends what strategy Zheng Zhu and Chong are utilising here.

Surprised A&G would advise on staying for Daphne as they have access to SPA and the case.

Lets see if legal rep changes in the next court filings for the defendents. Daphne utilising tier 1 rep without Zheng Zhu financial help, maybe she got indemnity maybe ? makes no sense but then to also file stays to support Zheng Zhu doesnt help chong!

Exactly! Right and wrong still has to have its day in court if its not sttled.

Dismissing the stay applications does not mean the court has ruled on the merits of the claims. It has not decided that Zheng, Choo, or Chong actually did anything wrong or that Semnet suffered the losses claimed. That will be decided much later (at trial ).

It is a procedural win for Semnet on the forum (Court vs Arbitration).

GST has now officially announced that the stay applications were dismissed on 26 May. This is a positive procedural development for Semnet/GST in the litigation, though the heavy lifting (proving the actual breaches and damages) still lies ahead.

Well done on this procedure, its a good win for GST. No doubt!

Now we see how Zheng Zhu react with the case, the appeals/counter claims and how more procedure goes x;)

But defo advantage Semnet/GST for now. The claims ouside of the SPA were proven and if Zheng Zhu continue litigating and we will see clues nexct couple of weeks then its the battle of the high court!

But well done first main step has been won!

Https://sg.linkedin.com/in/mervynzheng

Mervs been busy........

Got himself a diploma x;)

Professional Diploma in Digital Innovation

Lithan

Issued Apr 2026

Credential ID LA26040003897

The Professional Diploma in Digital Innovation issued by Lithan Academy (Credential ID: LA26040003897) is a specialised, enterprise-focused qualification designed for the strategic modernization of businesses. Lol he tried with Semnet x;)

Where have I said about anyone being mean to me ?

This is what you lot do just make stuff up, Ive got thick skin and give as good as i get but abusing ladies like Kat is beyond the pale for me, That's not the principles 'Men' should carry.

Ray is a bully so are you, and until recently Ray couldnt even counter with arguments, would just rage at anyone!

With excellent information from regulators like the BOL and the ESMA, I predicted these failures, and you all ridiculed it lol

So now its not just Massi knows its everyone knows lol.

So its easy to swap then Ray if everyone knows?