You will note that the "next step" (to adopt the wording from AGS's announcement below) could be either of the following:
1. The lease conditions are accepted by the applicant (mining lease granted); or 2. The applicant appeals to the minister.
AGS announced that, "The next step is for Quasar and ACE to advise the Mining Registrar that they are prepared to accept a mineral lease under the terms and conditions offered."
AGS did NOT announce, "The next step is for Quasar and ACE to advise the Mining Registrar that they are not prepared to accept a mineral lease under the terms and conditions offered and intends to appeal to the Minister."
AGS clearly chose to frame its announcement in a way that INDICATES that it is to notify PIRSA that it accepts the terms/conditions offered in the lease. AGS could have, but did not, indicate that they are not prepared to accept a mineral lease under the terms and conditions offered.
You must ask yourself, "Why did AGS intentionally write that last paragraph in the way that they did?" There is an underlining reason.
As for my sentence being "a bit malformed", please point out precisely what aspect you say is malformed so that I can correct it if necessary. I aim to post factual information with references to source material. I also provide my opinion with reasons as to how I formed such opinions. I like to be transparent so that I am considered a valued poster.
With respect, your comments regarding the M&D C case are not relevant for present purposes. The issuing of the mineral lease is subject to legislation and is a separate process to the litigation.
