Ann: Director Appointment/Resignation, page-39

OM
I hope you dont mind

I think this was OMs

POINT

I did get the jist of where you were coming from OM after reading your link i but do believe you explained things to a T in a previous POST


OMs POST BELOW Dated 24/2/15


For those that didn't know. Our JV partners Mercus have been in VIC Federal Court since last year, suing IEPL (Industrial Energy Pty Ltd) and subsidiary, HRL, (the owner of Energy Brix & Morwell Briquette factory) for a sum in excess of $9 million. This includes $3.73 million for ownership of the stockpile remaining on the premises and $5.75 million for non-payment of service fees during Mecrus' contract to run the factory.

IEPL and HRL tried to block the case by claiming if Mercus lost, they wouldn't be able to afford IEPL's legal court costs.

Yesterday (23rd Feb) Judge Murphy ordered that 1) The application for security for costs is dismissed and 2) The Respondents (IEPL / HRL) pay the costs of the application.

Quote - Judge Murphy: "If Mecrus was paid for the stockpile as it sought in September 2014 its financial position would be improved by about $3.7 million, and there would be no question that it was able to satisfy an adverse costs order if it was unsuccessful in the litigation. As I have said, my preliminary view is that Mecrus enjoys better than reasonable prospects of success in its Stockpile claim..."

What does this have to do with ECT? Well, Mecrus spent $3 million rebuilding the briquette factory from its ashes. Would IEPL prefer to hand over millions of $$$ in cash to our JV partner, or would they prefer part payment in the form of a mothballed factory (Coldry plant)?

All IMO.

Not to mention EL5119.

Take the time to read paragraphs 46, 47 of Justice Murphy's ruling.

OM

Dont take to much time out

LOVE YOUR WORK

JWS now your up to speed

GO GO GO ESI