Ann: Quarterly Activities/Appendix 4C Cash Flow Report, page-34

Hi Sticky, for a non holder, it might be just "a legal challenge". But for SH, and for the broader O+G industry, it's a pivotal moment which will show that Government corruption cannot sidestep the rule of law when making administrative decisions. So, two questions will be asked and answered in this case:-

1. Does the JA have arbitrary power to disregard the technical advice of the regulator, NOPTA, and make a decision based on perceived possible outcomes of future events?
OR
2. Did the JA know from day one that it did not hold a right of veto, and that their grounds for refusal would never stand up to scrutiny, and that their only objective was to delay the approval until after the election?
Starting on 30/4/25, and continuing until June, the Government will be required to disclose the basis for their decision, forced to prove it has a reasonable prospect of success under model litigant policy, and made to hand over the details of the caucus policy that it unanimously supported that prevented Husic from adopting the NOPTA recommendations which were to approve both applications.

IMO, the Government will be forced into mediation as the case cannot be defended.

This type of conduct by the JA is unprecedented, and the entire resources industry will be watching.

JMO. Not advice. DYOR.