Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Indivior Plc LSE:INDV London Ordinary Share GB00BRS65X63 ORD USD0.10
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.10 0.07% 148.10 148.40 148.60 152.00 146.00 152.00 531,449 16:35:05
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology 473.2 -126.5 -14.6 - 1,087

Indivior Share Discussion Threads

Showing 3651 to 3674 of 3750 messages
Chat Pages: 150  149  148  147  146  145  144  143  142  141  140  139  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
31/12/2020
14:30
Price (GBX) 108.80 4.82% (5.00) Open / Last close 103.50 / 108.80 High / Low 108.80 / 103.50 Bid / Offer 108.30 / 108.40 Special Condition: - Trading Status: Market Close FTSE 250 As at 31.12.20 14:13:49 - All data delayed at least 15 minutes
waldron
29/12/2020
17:15
Share Price: 103.40 Change: 0.70 (0.68%)
the grumpy old men
23/12/2020
10:17
MOVING BACK UP Price (GBX) 96.80 2.38% (2.25) Open / Last close 95.65 / 94.55 High / Low 96.80 / 94.75 Bid / Offer 96.70 / 97.00 Special Condition: - Trading Status: Regular Trading FTSE 250 As at 23.12.20 10:00:47 - All data delayed at least 15 minutes
waldron
23/12/2020
09:03
Share Price: 95.35 Change: 0.80 (0.85%)
the grumpy old men
19/12/2020
07:44
we all have 6 months of home detention at the moment
dealy
18/12/2020
09:51
Https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-medical-director-suboxone-manufacturer-indivior-sentenced-connection-drug-safety Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, December 17, 2020 Timothy Baxter, the former medical director of Indivior PLC, was sentenced today in federal court in Abingdon, Virginia, to six months of home detention and 100 hours of community service in connection with the company’s marketing of an opioid drug.
adrian j boris
16/12/2020
13:06
If there was an obvious case for the indemnification to be valid then Indivior would not have issued their recent "not our problem" RNS. The indemnification clause should be fairly easy to interpret.Yet on the other hand why would RB throw the cat among the pigeons if they didn't think the contrary?So something is not right here. Insurance claim seems the most likely explanation
dealy
15/12/2020
20:56
RB would also need to demonstrate that they did everything possible to mitigate its loss and my guess is they perhaps didn't and felt they could rely on an indemnity to cover them. Either way I expect this is going to drag on for a long time and cost a bucket to both sides in legal advice. Unfortunately Indv being the smaller will take more of the pain I suspect
baddeal
14/12/2020
10:50
Nice posts lindowcross 13 Dec '20 - 16:30 - 3095 of 3095 thank you
sarkasm
13/12/2020
16:30
If RB argues that the penalties or payments it had to pay the US authorities were a result of INDV's actions or omissions as a party to a commercial contract, and the indemnity should cover those payments then it's possible the claim won't be enforceable in the English courts. RB might be prevented under the doctrine of "ex turpi causa" from recovering for loss that is a consequence of its own illegal act. In other words RB paid up to the americans presumably because it recognised it broke their laws - even though they may not have been expressly admitted this at the time - and so it would be wrong for those sums to be recovered from INDV as the losses were a consequence of its own illegal actS. (These are just my musings, possibly completely wrong, so I certainly wouldn't advise anyone to base their investment decisions on this! But for sure m'learned friends will be advising on the dispute and the respective strengths of the opposing arguments)
lindowcross
13/12/2020
16:02
Looks like the wording of the clause is not yet in the public domain. It's difficult to gauge the effect on Indivior without knowing the precise wording of the indemnity clause and the whole wording of the contract. An indemnity is a primary obligation, so it's an express obligation to compensate someone for loss or damage and is independent of the obligations of the party, that is, INDV, whose promises or contractual terms are being reinforced by the provision of the indemnity. The indemnity does not depend on having to prove a breach of a contractual obligation. So what did INDV promise to do or not do? And did their lawyers protect them at the time with reasonable safeguards in the drafting of the contract? It looks like RB has filed the Claim Form which just sets out a brief summary of the claim and the full Points of Claim will come within the next 3-4 months setting out exactly why it is they claim INDV is in breach of the indemnity and so owes them cash. Perhaps directors of RB were advised they had no option but to bring the claim due to their legal duty to shareholders.
lindowcross
03/12/2020
08:43
I guessed that dealy just that its not evident its a robo but tend to go with your feeling also any news however how robtic might move the sp have a super day and be careful out there dealy 3 Dec '20 - 08:38 - 3092 of 3093 0 0 0 I'm not criticising Waldron. Just the news agencies that do this
the grumpy old men
03/12/2020
08:38
I'm not criticising Waldron. Just the news agencies that do this
dealy
03/12/2020
08:07
Real-time Estimate Quote. Real-time Estimate CHI-X - 12/03 08:06:01 am nice start to the day 102 GBX +0.99%
the grumpy old men
03/12/2020
08:06
LOL Could well be so, but still appreciate those posting info related to indivior thank you very much
the grumpy old men
03/12/2020
07:33
these articles are written by robots. Literally . They do nothing other than repeat the RNS.
dealy
03/12/2020
04:51
Https://invezz.com/news/2020/12/02/indivior-stock-price-remains-under-pressure-following-a-1bn-opioid-claims-lawsuit/
waldron
01/12/2020
09:39
so we have a situation of extreme stupidity here (a bit like the current Brexit discussions where unnecessary uncertainty has been allowed to fester,).can't the 2 CEO's pick up the phone and discuss this like professionals?
dealy
30/11/2020
19:34
THE WISH LIST GIVING BOXES,Supports and Resistences to determine channels and trends together with broker targets which might of course make you smile or and smirk 70 to 80p 80 to 90p 90 to 100p 100 to 110p$$$$$$$$$$$$$ WE ARE HERE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 110 to 120p 120 to 130p 130 to 140p 140 to 150p 150 to 160p 160 to 170pCiti target 165p 170 to 180p 180 to 190p 190 to 200p Jefferies target 200p Https://www.marketscreener.com/INDIVIOR-19344116/ DECEMBER END 2019 GIVES 39p which puts us into the 30 to 40p BOX again June ends in the 80 to 90p BOX at 83p July ends at 137.60p August ends at 118.70p September ends at 117p October ends at 110.30p November ends at 101.10p
waldron
30/11/2020
19:33
Price (GBX) 101.10 1.35% (1.35) Open / Last close 96.85 / 101.10 High / Low 111.10 / 96.85 Bid / Offer 101.10 / 102.10
waldron
30/11/2020
09:48
There are cross indemnities between the two companies. From the Reckitt lawyers point of view it seems they say it was just good housekeeping in keeping the files up to date or active. Whoever did the legal review didn't think to inform the Reckitt chain of command/ compliance- which is why there was no communication between the companies! But as Mandy Rice Davis once said " well, they would say that etc etc!"
gregmorg
30/11/2020
08:44
well, it's not about guilt. It's about the validity of the claim. This is not just going to disappear. Why don't the companies talk to each other?
dealy
30/11/2020
08:25
Indivior PLC said Monday that it believes a claimed filed by Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC against it is without merit and vowed to fully and vigorously defend itself in any proceedings related to the claim. The U.K. pharmaceutical company on Friday said a claim for 1.07 billion pounds ($1.42 billion) against it had been submitted to the Commercial Court in London by consumer-goods giant Reckitt Benckiser on Nov. 13. Indivior said the claim relates to an indemnity contained in a 2014 demerger agreement between it and Reckitt Benckiser. The claim hasn't been served on Indivior at the present time, the company said. Indivior noted comments by Reckitt Benckiser in The Times of London and Financial Times newspapers that it "regularly takes certain procedural steps to preserve potential claims." Indivior said it believes it has strong grounds for defending against the claim should it be served, based on the information available to the company. Write to Adria Calatayud at adria.calatayud@dowjones.com (END) Dow Jones Newswires November 30, 2020 02:54 ET (07:54 GMT)
waldron
30/11/2020
07:46
Doesn't really clarify things.Do you think the management of Indivior have contacted RB or did they just nip out to the newsagents and buy an FT.No FT,no comment.Indivior PLC ("Indivior" or "the Company"), as an entitled party, has reviewed the claim Reckitt Benckiser Group ("RB") filed against the Company in the Commercial High Court in London on November 13, 2020. At the present time, the claim has not been served on the Company. Indivior notes reported comments by RB, as published in The Times and Financial Times newspapers on November 27, 2020, that RB "regularly takes certain procedural steps to preserve potential claims."Based on the information available to it, Indivior strongly believes that the claim is without merit and that it has strong grounds for defending against the claim should it be served. If the claim is served, Indivior will fully and vigorously defend itself in any proceedings related to the claim.Indivior will make further announcements as appropriate, including in relation to whether the claim is served.
steeplejack
Chat Pages: 150  149  148  147  146  145  144  143  142  141  140  139  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
INDV
Indivior
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210517 01:29:19