appeals case, page-98

"of course only a judge can sort this mess out..."
TL, Truer words have never been spoken.

From the website

"ACE is seeking damages from Heathgate and damages and restitution of the 75% interest in the exploration licence over the Four Mile from Quasar arising from Quasar’s and Heathgate’s failure to disclose to ACE information concerning the prospectivity of part of that tenement."

"ACE also contends that Quasar, with the assistance or participation of Heathgate, breached its obligations under the joint venture agreement,its fiduciary obligations owed to ACE and misused confidential information when Quasar sought, and obtained, a one-year extension of the earn-in period and, subsequently, the transfer of a 75% interest
in the exploration licence."

Two parts here at the crux of the matter.imo

1 "failure to disclose to ACE information concerning prospectivity of part of that tenement"

2 "misused confidential information when Quasar sought, and obtained, a one-year extension of the earn-in period and, subsequently, the transfer of a 75% interest
in the exploration licence"

One mentions "prospectivity of part of that tenement"

Note "Part" Not "all".

Two mentions "misused confidential information"

Note "misused" Not "withheld".

We wont know the significance or the reality of AGS's claim until this is all over and that will probably only come about if AGS wins.imo

Reading the Judge's comments on the appeal and some of the released J/V Clauses, and then words such as "part and misused" in the claim from the Website, it does not instill confidence in me that AGS will get the 75% back. imo Hope I'm wrong.

Maybe the actual wording in the claim is different?

Bring on the Court Case. Please!.

Good luck from here.! We(AGS) need it.imo
Md