Ann: Spectrum provides update on VMC claim, page-43

Reading through the thread, I've got a question for the SPX team: On what grounds would anyone think that VMC would be GIVEN the SPX PW tenements should they win in the Supreme Court?

VMC never owned the tenements (for me that's an important point) however they seem to be claiming that they were hard done by in the bidding process as SPX may have used inside information allegedly provided by VMC (but perhaps provided to both parties by the seller?).

To the best of my knowledge that doesn't warrant a transfer of ownership and as the Sprott report pointed out, legal precedents show that even a VMC victory will likely NOT affect title (see @Session post in this thread). To use a real estate analogue, it would be like missing out on a house at auction (after all the bidders had met with the seller) because you'd failed to lodge a high enough bid or because the seller didn't want to deal with you - it doesn't give you any claim over the property at a later date!

So it would seem that at best VMC MIGHT be awarded damages against the defendants and as such MAY be able to force SPX to the table to negotiate some sort of percentage of the project part of a settlement but that could prove a VERY expensive legal tactic.

It looks to me like VMC is trying it on because they missed out on the opportunity and their SHs are now giving them grief following the PW North discovery - I guess time will tell.

Final questions: Why would VMC involve their broker in the purchase of a project? WT$? And why did it take VMC nearly a YEAR to lodge their claim with the Courts?

I have a theory but I am more interested to hear other investor's comments on the above?