westrip takes swipe at greenland, page-3

Looks like the article raises more questions about Westrip than it does about GGG.

Minority Shareholders of Westrip are arguing that the 39% of the Greenland JV belongs to Westrip.

The Board of Westrip are apparently paying lawyers to argue that the 39% of this valuable JV doesn't belong to Westrip, but belongs to Mr Powar (a director of Westrip).

Obviously no conflict of interest there for the Westrip directors [/sarc]

In terms of the potential costs for GGG:
Once the court decides who owns the 39% of the JV it is end of story.

Scenario 1:
Court: "Congratulations Westrip - you own 39% of this valuable JV"
Westrip: "Thanks! Can we claim for damages and costs now?"
Court: "No. You now own 39% of a valuable JV that your directors said you didn't own"
Powar: "Can I claim for damages and costs?"
Court: "No. You lost"

Scenario 2:
Court: "Congratulations Mr Powar, you own 39% of this valuable JV"
Westrip: "Can we claim for damages now?"
Court: "No. Your lawyers and directors were arguing that you didn't own the JV anyway."
Westrip: "Can we claim for costs?"
Court: "Minority shareholders genuinely thought you owned this assets and as a company you were paying lawyers to argue that you didn't own a valuable asset??? Your directors should have been paying the costs. No costs awarded to Westrip!"
Powar: "Can I claim for damages?"
Court: "No. We have said that you own the asset. What else have you lost?"
Powar: "Hmmmm... Nothing. Maybe we can claim for costs"
Court: "OK! We'll consider it, but only reasonable costs and given the conflict of interest involved, and how reasonable the minority shareholders case was, it is something that we will have to seriously consider."

And then of course costs would be awarded against the minority shareholders and not GGG directly.

And Unless Mr Powar and Westrip know what the actual agreement is between the minority shareholders and GGG, they have no idea where GGG's liability was capped and how material GGG's exposure is.

Mr Powar's letter to the ASX is a stab in the dark.

Thanks for the link Bradley, the article helped me piece together alot of the pieces that have left me wondering over the last few weeks. I didn't realise that it was one of the directors of Westrip who is claiming ownership of the 39% of the JV (at the detriment of Westrip).