Yes well good luck with that. My recollection (at least of my...

Yes well good luck with that. My recollection (at least of my interpretation at the time) after reading the disclosures and mediation? adjudication? I can't really recall was that SXE did extra work to get a troubled project over the line but allegedly failed to follow the prescribed change management process.

The net result being that while SXE felt they had a pretty good moral case DCG may have felt they had a solid legal case. In fairness to SXE, sometimes (large) end customers remember who came through for them. If one vendor isn't performing sometimes the worst thing for everyone can be to not step up and just get it done. Imagine you're providing skilled resources in a remote area and have other customers/jobs backed up waiting for those resources.....

Other potential considerations may include whether DCG was in a position to pass any of those costs up the line. There's a sizeable degree of interpretation (and frankly guesswork) in all of the above but (bottom line) I'm prepared to cut them a bit of slack although if you have a look at the size and corresponding definition of "contract assets" for SXE they do seem to carry a fair bit of risk on an ongoing basis.

Not sure where it is now but at the time they published those "contract assets" by financial year and a considerable portion were from over 12 months old. With this settlement I'm expecting that will now reduce.