You would have to think that if RIO policy is to sit on a valuable lease then they would have all the i's dotted & t's crosses wrt the Form 5 obligations.
The situation rests with the gov't position on whether or not RIO has lost the right to the tenement. That's the crux of the matter. You can forget public interest, this is a purely legal argument & should be quite interesting for a few years yet.
Hardrock.
You would have to think that if RIO policy is to sit on a...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 56 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
