I believe the agreement in respect of the rofr was commercial in...

I believe the agreement in respect of the rofr was commercial in confidence and as such the details were never released beyond the publicly known 2.5% royalty or acceptance of the offer terms on no less favourable grounds.

It is clear that delaying tactics are being used IMO as at the end of the day it is simply a matter of MIN saying they can or cannot match the offer and if they can't they take the 2.5% royalty.

I assume they are challenging the interpretation of a clause/s in the agreement in respect of the sale notice hence the indication of an expert interpretation being sought. It is very likely senior counsel was involved in the drafting of the notice and this is not something that senior counsels usually get wrong as they would be well aware of the provisions in the agreement having been before a Supreme Court justice on the matter in the last few weeks.