Osmo,

I believe that If we had hired a lawyer to protect our rights from the outset, we would have spent a lot of money, and then some, without much to show for it. When you deal with sharks in a creditors-take-all bankruptcy regime such as the CCAA, chances for success are slim to none. In this environment, legal action is only effective when the playing field is leveled.

The SCOTUS decision to reject certiorary is one that helps the common shareholders in four important ways:

First, becuase it shortens the collection process by at least a year.

Second, because that decision makes it clear that KRY is rightfully entitled to the remedy granted by the DE court (i.e. the sale of the CITGO shares if Venezuela does not pay up). And I will make a prediction here: Venezuela will pay up to avoid opening the pandora box that putting CITGO in play represents.

Third, U.S. Government foreign policy cannot serve to work fraud or injustice. So, if the U.S. wants to help Venezuela, it can lend it the money to pay KRY.

Fourth, once the distribution of the award is made possible by an order of the bankruptcy courts, shareholders can appeal the decision as of right.

It is only then that shareholders have the opportunity to expose the  failings of the CCAA proceedings. 

The way to the money legally owed to the shareholders is indeed through legal action, but only at a time when that action will be effective.