Oceanking

What is Oceanking?

Company creditors have alleged a shortfall of more than £1.3 billion ($1.7 billion), while administrators have accused Raja of orchestrating a scheme through which funds were systematically extracted from MFS and related entities.

A separate lawsuit brought on behalf of creditors alleges Raja received more than £408 million ($545 million) from funds managed by MFS into personal bank accounts across the UK, Monaco, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates, according to The Telegraph.

Raja has also been accused of acquiring a fleet of luxury vehicles. The Telegraph reported these included six Ferraris, three Aston Martins, three Rolls-Royces, and two Mercedes-Benz vehicles.

About Oceanking

“The combined entity will be able to deliver the same rate of growth and the same rate of shareholder distribution, but with a larger pro forma free float and liquidity,” Angelozzi outlined.

“So you get the same stable and predictable growth and you get the capital returns. You get no additional risk, and you get the benefits of the new markets and the online opportunities on top of the synergies, which are also pretty significant. So that’s why this makes a lot of sense to us.”

Cirsa CEO Antonio Hostench echoed Angelozzi’s confidence, adding: “On our side, we see this as a great opportunity because as Guglielmo said, there is no overlap between the companies, almost no overlap.

What is Oceanking?

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”

This particular lawsuit involving Fox Financial, one of a growing list IPI is battling, centers on an arrangement the company made with a third party, Forson Holdings. That entity had leased property from Fox in 2016, but fell behind. IPI had signed as a guarantor of that lease agreement and, as such, was responsible for covering Forson in the event payments weren’t made. However, it decided it didn’t need to follow the terms of the contract.