Thanks for your response gassed.With regards to an appeal of the...

Thanks for your response gassed.

With regards to an appeal of the decision, Icon made the decision for the department by not having any finance as well as not complying with the prior ATP 855 work program that Icon provided and accepted. A Judicial Review provides the process of how a decision was made.

It known that Icon could not meet the capability criteria for the renewal (s84(2)(b)(ii) https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2004-025#ch.2-pt.1-div.5) which required Icon to prove that they have the financial capability to carry out the proposed work program. As they didn't do the prior work program (they had no finance) and had no cash, there is little reason to see how they would meet this renewal requirement. By the way, a non-binding letter of intent is not evidence of financial capability.

Even worse, the Minister/decision maker cannot approve the renewal as Icon did not comply with the prior work program (ref s82(1)(b) and s84(2)(b)(iii)(B)).

The legislation is what the judge will assess the appeal against and based on the legislation and the non-compliance and lack of finances of Icon, the decision was correct, the permit was not renewed and ATP 855 ended. Full stop. There are no provisions to reinstate a permit once it has ended.

Icon has no assets, none. I cannot explain why anyone would throw money at a company with no assets and no future. The only potential that I see for ICN is to use it as a shell for a backdoor listing.