Big Week?, page-159

Hi Jill,
Yes it does look like Ropoh was early raising the 'interposed entity' trick as an explanation for the 'legal glitch'. It is the simplest explanation for why FAR had no prior knowledge; ie. if CON had taken the view that it was unnecessary to lodge a PE notice.
It certainly seems to be something around PE notices. If we look at Santos v Apache the specific issue was around determination of value (because in that case the transaction figure was not expressed in simple cash terms, having scrip involved IIRC). A related possibility is that FAR is contesting the transaction value, maybe even arguing that the $80m 'conditional' payment is not part of the PE value because it is for something else, ie, other than direct consideration for the sale of working interest.
This is pure conjecture and speculation on my part.
Cheers