Ann: Shareholder Update, page-80

They obviously asked for info from company and are given responses. The info ASIC had didn't reach a threshold and thus no warrants to obtain information the company might not want to give out, so they're never going to find anything.
Just because things went wrong, badly, catastrophically does not mean conduct reaches a threshold ASIC may reasonably believe criminal misconduct has occurred. Given their (lack of) funding and true investigative work, they were never likely to launch anything more than a few 'please explain' letters IMO. But at least that pressure from holders and ASIC saved us (IMO) our LLL holding - which is bailing us out big time now.

I think anyone would have a very hard time indeed proving any level of conduct that will result in compensation much less criminal wrong doing, given the murky depths are most likely in Mali, hence I wouldn't want to waste money trying to find out with more expensive investigations from a potential new board. As someone pointed out above it was likely catastrophic failure of governance and accountability through the subsidiary that did us in (combined with a very overly optimistic view of the project from the get-go - from Cowden and the BOD who obviously lost faith in the lithium market - because IMO they were and are fools).