WPL are the owner of the Company that is subject to the...

WPL are the owner of the Company that is subject to the arbitration case which means Woodside is the defendant to the arbitration


Sooooo...what I'm understanding is that cop, whilst being a party to the joint venture and having agreed to all the obligations of the said jv, then offloaded it's share of the jv into a new entity which it then onsold to woodside, apparently without offering the same deal to all of the original jv partners.
I don't get how it is now suggested that woodside are now the other party in the arbitration
I see woodside as a third party. Surely the rights of Far exist according to the original agreement which woodside are not a party to.
How can it be that cop can ride off into the sunset leaving woodside's snout in the trough when woodside were never a party to the original jv and it's interpretations.

Woodside to me are either winners or losers after the legal argument applicable to the original jv agreement..
Collateral damage maybe but no doubt they did their DD prior to buying in..
Caveat emptor