Russian R - one of the 3 issues decided on nov 8 is lynas was...

Russian R - one of the 3 issues decided on nov 8 is lynas was included as a respondent to the case. Pls do more research b4 posting.

Goofy - you are right on, the judge noted in her deliberations on nov 8 that smsl have not made any undertaking to indemnify lynas should they lose the injunction, and as they have not proven that that there will be a catastrophic danger if an interim injunction is not granted, the risk of granting an interim is too high. As you have pointed out, the damages will be even greater now that lynas is in operation. So if it was true before it is more true now. By the way smsl have never challenged the truth of evidence given to the court they actually accepted them. Their only case is the court should be more prudent and careful. Well the judge has done that. So definitely no interim. JR is the next hearing, and perhaps more appeal to the JV.