judgement day, page-257

(a) defining what is and what is not misleading & deceptive conduct


To define what is misleading and deceptive conduct you can look at duty, intent and consequence. Heathgate had a duty not to mislead or take advantage of the situation, they held an advantage in having some knowledge. In with holding exploration data they could be considered to have an intention to defraud AGS. In my opinion consequences are critical because if they arent large the duty and intent is not significant. Or the appropriate punishment for a crime with minor consequence wont be large.

(b) establishing whether AGS was or was not misled and/or deceived;

I get the impression Heathgate has admitted they didnt supply the information to AGS.

(c) if AGS was misled or deceived, what damages are appropriate.

Yes what damages are appropriate, and from what I gather AGS in asking for the return of 100% of the mine is accusing Heathgate of a very serious offence that had serious consequences for its shareholders and other stakeholders.

"so what AGS may or may not be asking for is totally irrelevant to his order of thinking".
I disagree, being spurious is a very bad look.

I think the case is ment to run 5 weeks.
I have no idea what the result will be. I cant see Heathgate blinking about the court case but it is pretty complex and other things may influence what happens.