So lets do a deeper dive and see what Ed Husic and Anthony...

So lets do a deeper dive and see what Ed Husic and Anthony Albanese will be confronted with when Advent respond to Albo/Ed's concerns...

We know that Scott Morrison had three excuses for refusing the PEP11 applications:-

1. Public Interest

The definition is grey. Local? State? National? in any event, DISER advised Scott Morrison as follows:-

Community opposition and environmental concerns are matters you may haveregard to, and you can determine the weight to give them. However, public interestgrounds cannot be the sole reason for refusing this request.

So, in the unlikely event that this gets to court, it will be necessary for Albanese to prove up one of his other reasons.

2. Financial

The DISER brief advised Scott Morrison as follows:-

There is uncertainty as to whether the Applicant has, or will have, access toadequate financial resources to allow it to fulfil obligations under the titleconditions.

and

Whilst the Applicant has raised some funds, there is aconsiderable shortfall in what is required to fund the proposed activities.

With over $10M+ in available cash over related entities, this argument is now void. There never was a "considerable shortfall" but the gap between the work program schedule and the cash held position is now lower than December 2021, when the above was written. The current, improved, funding position will be outlined in the response to concerns and DISR will need to revise their position. The DISR position could only be to remove this as a concern.

3. Force Majeure

Advent, in it's 2020 submission argued that the illegal removal of David Breeze had caused a delay, and that this meets the criteria for a "Force Majeure" event. On 24th November 2016, the Chairman of MMR, Mr Goh Hock announced to the ASX that David Breeze had been terminated as MD and that Mr Hock had installed himself interim MD. There are only two ways a Director can be removed, by resignation, or by resolution at a properly sanctioned shareholder meeting. David was ultimately reinstated to Advent in August 2019, and to MMR in October 2020. DISER briefed Scott Morrison as follows:-

The commercial circumstances cited by the Applicant as reasons for delaysare another relevant consideration, but it does not constitute force majeureas defined in the Guideline.

The guideline describes Force Majeure as follows:-

2.13. If the ability of a titleholder to meet a work program commitment is adversely impacted by an event that cannot be reasonably anticipated or controlled during the course of the exploration work program via experience or care (force majeure) the Joint Authority may approve a suspension or a suspension and extension.
2.14. An application for a suspension or suspension and extension on force majeure grounds must include substantial and compelling documentary evidence to demonstrate how the force majeure circumstance has adversely impacted the ability to complete the work program, and a Gantt chart showing the proposed schedule for the forward work program.
2.15. Commercial circumstances and common risks in the industry are not considered to constitute force majeure. These may influence the perceived commercial viability of an activity but would not normally prevent an explorer from adhering to its commitment.

It is inconceivable that the "man on the Packham Bus" would consider the illegal removal of a Managing Director as a "common risk".

DISER advised Scott Morrison as follows:-

a) The Guidelines describe circumstances which usually constitute forcemajeure; the application by the Applicant has not provided sufficientinformation to meet those criteria and therefore no force majeure hasoccurred. While company legal disputes are not considered a force majeureevent, you may still take into account that unclear company structure and asignificant change in exploration strategy has affected the Applicant’stimelines. Nevertheless, you may determine that this does not justifyapproval of the application, taking into account that:
i. The internal company issues quoted by the Applicant in its application arecommon risks in the industry and do not support reasons for a suspensionand extension of the conditions on the title.

So, Albanese and Husic have a massive problem. Their strongest accompaniment to the Public Interest concern, financial uncertainty, has been eliminated. That leaves them in the uncomfortable position of needing to be able to convince the lawyers that the illegal removal of a Director was a common risk. This is actually impossible IMO.

NOPTA also noted that COVID had been a factor in the delay. The End.