Skip to content
FTLABBefore

Topic map / Distress, exits and starting again

A remedy that exists, and a remedy you can use

Pass 2

Separate the clause from the path you can actually walk.

A contract, a statute, or a regulator’s complaints page may name something you could do. That is the remedy that exists. Whether you can use it depends on cost, the forum, the time left, the evidence you already hold, and who has to act. Negotiation, mediation, and a court or arbitration are options to compare with qualified advice. Write the objective, the time, the cost, whether you could enforce a result, and whether the company can keep operating while you try.

DIFC Courts publishes a Mediation Service Centre. A scheme from 1 July to 31 December 2026 offers a one-hour consultation and a reduction in administration fees for eligible users who proceed. That is a route to ask about. It does not say mediation is the cheapest, the most suitable, or enforceable in your dispute.

In the Krafton matter, phase one decided an operational-control breach and ordered restoration. It reserved whether the earnout was wrongfully impaired and whether money damages are owed. A pleading is not a decision that money will be paid. Do not publish an accusation as a substitute for either list.

Question. How do you compare a negotiated resolution with an enforceable remedy, including time, cost, and practical recovery?

I have already signed, paid or lost access if the commitment is no longer only a plan.

Sources

  • RegulatoryChecked 14 October 2026

    Mediation Service Centre · DIFC Courts

    DIFC Courts describes a mediation service facilitated by its Panel of Mediators, and says the process is confidential. A Commercial Mediation Scheme with The Mediation Hub MENA runs from 1 July to 31 December 2026 and offers eligible users a complimentary one-hour conflict management consultation and a 50 percent reduction in administration fees if they proceed. The page does not say mediation is the cheapest route, or that a result can be enforced in a particular case. This site does not recommend it.

  • Regulatory16 March 2026

    Fortis Advisors LLC v. Krafton, Inc. · Court of Chancery of Delaware

    C.A. No. 2025-0805-LWW, Vice Chancellor Will. Submitted 9 January 2026, decided 16 March 2026. The opinion was read for this pass. Phase One entered judgment that Krafton breached the equity purchase agreement by terminating the key employees without valid cause and by seizing operational control of Unknown Worlds. The remedy is specific performance: Edward Gill is reinstated as CEO with operational authority, and the base earnout testing period is extended by 258 days to 15 September 2026. The opinion says whether Krafton’s actions wrongfully impaired the earnout, and whether any resulting money damages are owed, are reserved for the second phase. One Delaware dispute. Not a rule for other contracts, and not a current docket status.