I sold my IGO on this news, and because I wanted to top up other...

I sold my IGO on this news, and because I wanted to top up other hugely disadvantaged stocks.

However from the legal point of view I have 2 questions.

1. How can South prove that WMC owned all the data in the database? Some could have been added (say from WA Govt open sources) just for completeness. Or obtained from other Companies without documentary proof of ownership. I think that would blow the Contract which gave rise to the Royalty out of the water.

2. If the action which gave rise to the Royalty was 'discovery based directly on the use of the database' - then in my mind that excludes the creation of a target, or targets for further exploration work, which likely included obtaining further soils and geophysical data for drill placement, and the drilling which actually makes the discovery.
Perhaps the database gave rise to 10 targets in a certain area, but further work narrowed it down to 2 targets, which eventually gave rise to a mineable resource. Then it is hard to say the discovery was directly the result of the information in the database.
In any case the meaning of the wording needs to be carefully addressed, and perhaps even the intention, if not stated directly.

I rather expect that because of the delay in advancing this claim that something akin to issues like these was always taken as true.

IMO, the lawyers will soon find it to complicated and an easy way out found.