The performance payment referred to in the financial statements was the higher royalties due under the contract and paid by BRL. IMO Justice Dobson erred by referencing this fact to negate BRL's interpretation, when it is bleedingly obvious, purely from a business perspective, that their position was as stated. I'll wait to read the judgement before making up my own mind. Will we get to see Special Counsel's written advice on why this judgement should be appealed? Anyone know?
The performance payment referred to in the financial statements...
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
76.0¢ |
Change
-0.030(3.80%) |
Mkt cap ! $182.3M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 79.0¢ | 79.0¢ | 75.0¢ | $6.436K | 8.423K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1229 | 74.5¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 76.0¢ | 35195 | 1 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 12/09/2025 (20 minute delay) ? |
| BRL (ASX) Chart |