Sherlock,I am very busy right now since I have few deadlines. So...

Sherlock,
I am very busy right now since I have few deadlines. So I will respond to you very briefly:

First, I want to make it clear that difference of opinions is that I am forecasting that SMSL's request for injunction will be dismissed on Oct. 4 and you are forecasting that the court will approve of SMSL's request for injunction suspending the TOL.

Don't say later that you did not forecast an injunction. Since IF you are forecasting the same as me then why are you citing all those irrelevant Australian legal precedents about interlocutory injunctions? Let me remind you that the courts in Malaysia act inline with the Malaysian law not the Australian....

Now, I say that you are confused and don't understand the legal situation. I will state few facts and show that you don't know what you are talking about.

You wrote that the court issued an injunction suspending the TOL. This is incorrect. The court issued a stay that does not suspend the TOL but only keeps the status quo with respect to NEW operations regarding the TOL. So, the TOL is still in effect and Lynas can continue any operations that were started before the stay.

You also wrote that the dismissal precedents issued in Kuala Lompur and by the Appeal court are irrelevant. You are mistaken. Those are pretty relevant precedents since the legal grounds for SMSL requests is the same.

This is enough for today. If you forecast the same as me, than state it NOW before Oct. 4 and apologize for your attacks. If not than we shall see very soon who is right....:)