Ann: Branches Prospect Results Support Significant Gold Camp, page-46

A bit of info for anyone interested: https://www.asx.com.au/documents/rules/gn08_continuous_disclosure.pdf

"The reasonable person test in Listing Rule 3.1A.3 has a very narrow field of operation. It will only be tripped if there is something in the surrounding circumstances sufficient to displace the general rule described above. Two prime examples would be: where an entity has “cherry-picked” its disclosures, disclosing “good” information of a particular type that is likely to have a positive effect on the price or value of its securities but then declining to disclose “bad” information of the same type that is likely to have a negative effect on the price or value of its securities, on the pretence that it is not market sensitive or protected from disclosure by Listing Rule 3.1A – Example H5 in Annexure A is an illustration; or where the information needs to be disclosed in order to prevent an announcement of other information under Listing Rule 3.1 from being misleading or deceptive.

An example of a situation where a reasonable person would expect information to be disclosed under Listing Rule 3.1A.3:

Example H5: listed exploration company S has been conducting an infill drilling program. The assay results for the first five completed drill holes were very promising. S announced them to the market as soon as they became available and its share price increased by 20% and there was a significant uptick in the traded volume of its shares. S has just completed drilling on the next five holes, which are in close proximity to the first five. These drill holes have returned assay results which are far less promising, casting real doubts on the size and economic viability of the deposit. One of S’s directors asserts that the information from the latest holes is not sufficient for S to be able to form a view about the market sensitivity of the information and that S needs to drill further holes to have a more complete picture of the size and grade of the deposit before making any further announcement to the market. Even if this assertion was correct, S would be expected to make an immediate announcement regarding the latest assay results. In these circumstances, given the significant impact that the original promising assay results had on the market price of its shares and the far less promising results from holes in close proximity, a reasonable person would expect S to make such a disclosure."