BRL pending $40m USD lawsuit

When discussing the suppressed SP I find it somewhat interesting that there is little in depth discussion/debate on this thread in regards to the material pending $40m USD lawsuit.
This surely is the next biggest reason, behind the RCPS debarkle, why the SP appears to be discounted so is worthy of further discussion.

In the half yearly report the company says that under the disputed agreement BRL are liable to pay $40m USD once the first 25000 tonnes is shipped from the Buller project.
The company goes on to say that whilst more than 25000 tonnes has been mined they don’t deem that it has been shipped in a legal sense.
The company has said that it has been stock piled onsite.

Personally I have a problem with the companies position on this one and IMHO think they are on very shaky ground.

When looking for the definition of the word shipped this is what I found first.
To transport or to move put or take by means of transportation
or to cause transportation.

Well if the coal is from the Buller project, which the company readily admits, and it has been mined and then stock piled, which the company also admits, surely there is good claims that it must have been moved and taken via some form of transportation to where it is stock piled whether onsite or not.
The party suing them may well have them on a very sound technicality.

The word shipping appears to be a very loose terminology so I am sure the claimant believes they have a very good case.
Obviously up to the courts to decide now.