If I may, I would clarify one assumption you had during your opening remarks, and that is that there's a view that there's nothing wrong with this structure. We challenged this structure. We challenged the Canadian entity and were unsuccessful in a court case, but two other court cases, with slightly varied facts but very similar outcomes, still will be heard by the courts if we proceed.
So as far as the determination of whether this is or isn't appropriate is concerned, I wouldn't want to leave in the appellants' minds that we've now concluded there is nothing wrong with it. We still are litigating.