ASXCowboy - You seem to have completely missed the point here.
The claim will be against the Uranium Ban Sweden imposed in 2018 - Sweden will have known the plan for Aura to build a U mine at Haggan - and Aura would have spent a lot of money attempting to progress the project to a stage where they may - OR may not have - gone ahead with it as a mine. A DFS usually confirms such things.
However - The treaty IS in place to make sure that in such cases - businesses are compensated - in such a case as a Uranium ban. Sweden signed up to this. It's not forced upon them.
You mention the battery metals play SS may not be that good. I agree - I think there may be problems. However, I think this will only strengthen Auras case against Sweden - as they would not be able to turn it around. Meaning IF all IS potentially lost at Haggan - they should be compensated fairly.
The U ban wasn't touted until after Aura had spent money at Haggan on the premise that they could mine Uranium IF they had all the correct milestones in place. licences - permits - DFS. etc etc
The current price of V will help the case as well.
The only thing I'm not sure in - is whether they will settle in the 3 months - OR - take it to court.
Sweden may make a deal with Aura where they pay substantially less - as they coy needs money. Even if it was for 0.1% of the original SS NPV - it would but out Lind.
AIMO. T
AEE Price at posting:
0.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)