Share
913 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 918
clock Created with Sketch.
02/10/14
01:02
Share
Originally posted by navebregnir
↑
I thought that the basis of the first injunction was to prohibit axiom since the land was customary they didn't have the legal right to mine at the exclusion of SMMS while the issue was being determined.
I had a quick scan (on mobile) and couldn't see a record of the case being referred to the court of appeal with axiom losing. Could you please provide a link?
Expand
The decisions on the injunction are different and came before the actual decisions on Isabel. Here are all the decisions in chronological order and links to the judgments.
High Court decision grants injunction to SMM- 19th September 2011: http://www.smm.co.jp/solomon/others/pdf/131011-3.pdf
Court of Appeal decision dismisses Axiom's appeal upholding SMM's injunction - 24th March 2012: http://www.smm.co.jp/solomon/others/pdf/131011-4.pdf
After this came the decision on the actual issue ie the license to Isabel. The two main issues before the High Court were 1) Land Issue 2) Mine Issue
High Court (Justice Chetwynd) decision on Isabel in favour of SMM relating to issues 1 and 2 above - 18th June 2012: http://www.smm.co.jp/solomon/others/pdf/131011-5.pdf
Court of Appeal decision ordering a fresh trial before the High Court to determine the primary issue which is the Mine issue - 2nd November 2012: http://www.smm.co.jp/solomon/others/pdf/131011-7.pdf
Fresh trial decided by Justice brown in favour of Axiom - 24th September 2014