invest4it,It might have been inferred from your post that the...

invest4it,

It might have been inferred from your post that the judge would make a ruling that the 20% to landowners would be law.

I'm sure you would agree that the judge can only rule using current laws and may make recommendations as to any changes to future laws that would be inacted by the SI Government.

My understanding is this case comes down to whether the SI Government could award a mining lease to SMM and subsequently could the SI Government revoke the lease to SMM.

IMO, if the judge rules that a company can only have a maximum of three (3) mining leases as per the existing SI law then SMM should not have been granted another lease.

IMO, if this is the ruling then the SI Government revoking the SMM lease is legal.

IMO, the judge would then deem that the lease to AVQ is legal.