Whilst it might be accurate that the SAT referred the matter to...

Whilst it might be accurate that the SAT referred the matter to the supreme court, the statement enables an alternative interpretation; it would not surprise most observers here if Breeze lost the SAT appeal and subsequently decided to appeal to a higher jurisdiction. If the SAT referred the matter to the supreme court then it implies they couldn’t make a decision and therefore Breeze would have claimed that as a win!!

What should be concerning to the ASX compliance people and MMR (and BPH) shareholders is why this matter wasn’t properly and fully disclosed to the market in compliance with the continuous disclosure obligations.