Ann: TYX: Diamond Drilling Completed at Jumbuck, page-55

The defence details

The defence, filed in the Supreme Court of South Australia, strongly refutes Pybar’s claims on several grounds including that:
- Pybar failed to properly perform its services with due care and skill and in accordance with the contract and good industry practice;
- Pybar failed to supply equipment and supplies of an acceptable standard, quality and specification;
- Pybar failed to provide adequate and properly qualified and trained labour;
- Pybar failed to progress services as contracted; and
- Pybar failed to apply a proper standard of skill necessary to competently perform services.
The defence sets out the arguments as to how Pybar’s various breaches of contract gave rise to Challenger suffering significant loss and damage in its operations for the consideration of the court.
Independently of its defence, Challenger has filed claims against Pybar exceeding $9 million (plus GST) for losses including in respect of costs overruns, damage to property, losses caused by improper mining practices, and for recovery of overcharges.
Challenger’s counterclaim against Pybar exceeds Pybar’s claim against Challenger of $8.7 million (plus GST).

I think Performance has a substantial weight in this case,,, the Judge will let us all know ,,but I don't think this year WPG will be in front of a Judge....