The way I read the article - there are 3 important points:
both parties are subject to a land access agreement
WGAC have declined to sign land access deeds
FMG have declined to pay royalties under the land access agreement
Basically - because one condition (access) has not been met, another condition (payment of royalties) has not been met.
It's perfectly legitimate (not sure of the legalities - but I'll assume a 'their land, their choice' viewpoint) for WGAC to block access. However they can't then claim payment for the provision of access. That is fee for no service, and we all know how that is viewed!
Fortescue defends withholding royalties, page-16
Add FMG (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$19.55 |
Change
0.050(0.26%) |
Mkt cap ! $60.19B | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $19.98 | $20.30 | $19.51 | $184.3M | 9.305M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 2568 | $19.51 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $19.56 | 44282 | 3 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 08/11/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| FMG (ASX) Chart |