Based on what was argued by CHM they claim (and this was not disputed) that the money that was initially taken from CHM to purchase Jack Hills represents 58% of the intitial purchase price.
Therefore at the very least CHM should receive 58% of Jack Hills prior to any developement. In addition, CHM should also receive the finders fee that Barnes and Grimaldi received and this should be in the form of a direct holding in Crosslands. A few other things were mentioned but I didnt quite understand it all.
Note that 50% of Jack Hills was sold to Mitsubishi for $1.5 billion and Mitsubishi was aware of the litigation case and have included in their contract with MMX an indemnity clause.
If MMX lose, they are solely liable for an amount in excess of $300 million and potentially up to $800 million (depending on how Crosslands is valued).
MMX argued that CHM should be entitled to 0.4% of Crossland/Jack Hills(which they said is a couple of million) as this represents the money taken plus interest only.
This argument really didnt seem to hold any water.
CHM is not a bad punt for a stock valued at 2.4c and market cap of less tham $30 million.
CHM Price at posting:
2.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not 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)