legal proceedings update, page-202

Yes, concur de novo.
I have been quite scathing toward management and their transparency at times including a loss of respect for our court system....in fact below is a cut and past of an old email to management and their reply.
For a while it seemed my emails were not looked upon too kindly by IR and no doubt management as I drew their attention toward their Corporate Governance Statement and responsibility toward shareholders.

From: Alliance Investor Relations
To: w
Cc: Ian Pamensky
Sent: Tue, 26 October, 2010 8:43:35 AM
Subject: Re: JV Court Cases

Dear W
As I have pointed out in previous responses to your enquiries regarding the application heard in the Federal Court in Adelaide, the timing on the delivery of a judgment is entirely at the discretion of the presiding Judge. Our legal counsel – or for that matter any counsel involved in litigation in any jurisdiction – cannot demand or require a presiding judge to meet a particular timetable in making a decision. The independence of the judiciary is quite properly a crucial element of our legal system.
With regard to your numbered questions, I simply point to the updates provided on the Alliance website whenever further information on the status of legal proceedings become available. Also, any substantive developments regarding litigation issues are – and will be – advised immediately to the ASX. I am at loss as to what else that could be done to keep you and other shareholders informed on such matters. As to your subsequent questions, the Company is not going to provide a running commentary or express opinions on the legal processes currently in train.


On 26/10/10 7:15 AM, "w "

Hi John,

Once again I make the point 'almost 9 months to hand down his findings makes a mockery of our Judicial System'.

With respect to the court case:

Access to books, records and agreements pertaining to the Four Mile Joint Venture

Jurisdiction Federal Court of Australia (Adelaide)
Proceedings issued on 16 November 2009
Application heard on 22-23 February
Awaiting judgment.


Questions

1. Are the Board of AGS being Open and Transparent with their shareholders?
2. Why on earth would a Judge take so long to deliberate and if so, why have the legal team not questioned the time frame?
3. If it takes 9 months to get a decision on a relatively straight forward "Access to Books" Court Case; How long is our Company, the Board of Directors and their Legal Team expecting to wait for more in depth Court Cases such as "The Native Title Mining Agreement" and "Misleading and Deceptive Conduct"?

I look forward to your usual prompt reply
Kind regards from Shareholders
W /S /K S/F