GT55, i perused those court filings and recall the word "tenements" plural was used but after rereading them a couple times was overall left with the impression that only the one tenement that has K2/K1 and the 4 new open pits, that were permitted by Barrick in 2005, were covered by that particular court document. Last week the CFO of Superior/ Billabong did podcast interview and when he was directly questioned about VAN litigation stated he couldn't comment on it because hearings in front of WA Supreme Court were still ongoing and pleadings were still being filed back and forth but Superior would update market once legalities are fully resolved. Recent VAN stock price performance speak loudly about lawsuit outcome, imo. I can't see how VAN can sell equity to replenish treasury now so as to pay its legal team as well as Billabong legal costs with uncertainty of potentially catastrophic final court ruling hanging out there, particularly if final ruling could potentially allow Superior to earn into other VAN tenements through CAPEX investment.
VAN Price at posting:
3.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
