appeals case, page-93

TL et al,

>>I think we need to be clear that the MD&C case objective is about regaining the 75% that was allegedley taken for less than fair value by Heathgate et. al. <<


I have a problem reconciling this with the decision of the AGS Board to "sell" 75% of Four Mile for an (original) $300,000. I have seen nothing that indicates that the value of this 75% was dependant on what was found during the explorations.

The poor drafting of the Joint Venture Agreement and apparent lack of oversight by the AGS Board during the exploration are at the root of the problem in my view.

If H/Q were handed a carte blanche by the AGS Board they can hardly be critised for acting on it.

Happy to be corrected/enlightened/educated.