wharf dispute, page-118

Surandy,

With no knowledge of what EGO are going wharf for or the other way around,or whether wharf want to get in or walk away,I can see a number of things that could come into a potential claim against wharf,which could continue to stack up as every day passes.

$3.8M might just be the start.

One would be the extra unexpected costs associated with fulfilling the commitments That the JV had to complete as committed in the contract to Alcoa,that wharf is liable for possibly whether a JV partner or not.

One could be the costs of raising funds to do so for the plant construction including,underwriting costs and interest paid by EGO.

Another could be liability concerning the resource that may not be sufficient to meet contracted commitments to ALCOA and potential JV provisions as EGO have already made on the plant in the last 6 monthly.That may involve having to provide funds to drill future wells to meet this liability/commitment whether a JV member or not.The current resource figures may figure high in this calculation and court evidence.

Another could be losses associated with not being able to access funds held in trust,because of wharfs deemed withdrawl and having to borrow funds while having to pay production costs on condensate already produced.

DYOR+DYODD If successful EGO could even ask the court for wharf funds or assets to the appropriate value to be held in escrow under court order to meet these obligations as they fall due if they actually exist(obligations).
You know who I'd prefer not to be holding shares in.
Then again wharf may have rights and claims,time will tell.
The reality being they didn't pay up their share,says probably a lot less than they would like.
Outcome will be rather interesting and costly upfront for wharf,even should they want to pay up to get back in.