its not over yet, page-30

re: miningnews Banker is correct that it is clear Iranian law that governs and protects UCL's contractual interests. Their laws are supposedly very similar to our own in these matters.

At the AGM, when discussing the risks of retention one point that was made to us was that from the revolution on the government has a good record of preserving legal rights. I was told that no company that had assets had the time of the revolution that were properly covered by law and contract have had them misappropriated although there was certainly nationalisation of assets with the new socialist economy then.

There is a lot of misconception about Iran - people seem to see them as uncivilised, ungoverned savages. They are a very proud people. They are seeking to open up and encourage investment with a policy of privatisation endorsed by the Supreme Ruler, Ayatollah Khameini. Many prosperous Iranians who fled the revolution are returning to take part in the new economy. This action is not consistent with any of that so there is at least a good argument to be made and therefore more to go.

It will be a very interesting legal argument by Imidro that says UCL breached in 2001 but they could legimately let us do all the work continuously for years, spend nearly A$20 million, get to finance stage and then repudiate the agreements. Good test of how far Iran has come and critical for the future of foreign investment in the country.