t/over rio, page-26

People (particularly Sparki),
From my ‘research’ the reason that Rio went straight to the Minister is that was there only cause of action they could take (read my earlier posts). It could end up in Court but Rio would have to claim that the Ministers decision was a breach of natural justice, which if the Minister does give it CAZ then how can that be a breach of natural justice as he is only upholding the Mining Act. If the tenement goes to Rio, then there will be a court case as CAZ could claim it was a breach of natural Justice.

If the Minister is going to give it to Rio he had better be prepared for a WA Inc style barrage with the amount of publicity this is getting. I can see the Libs coming out and saying that they would have supported the little guy, remember Australia loves an underdog and to cut down a tall poppy. They don’t come much bigger than Rio and its not like this is affecting Rios share price so those share holders cant complain.

And what has Bronzewing got to do with Rio. Unless your talking about the Bronzewing South decision which I believe actually assists CAZ.

In regards to the Rio take over it may be cheaper for Rio to take CAZ over than compensate Wright and Hancock. Probably better for Rio to have the deposit and not have to compensate and maybe 30yrs down the track mine it. Its not like a couple hundred million is out of their price range. I still think that if there is a takeover it will be BHP as they are mining to within a few hundred metres and Iron ore is not like gold which just stopped at the boundary of the Bronzweing south tenement