Hi Pigster. I wasn't around at the time. But my understanding...

Hi Pigster. I wasn't around at the time. But my understanding from reading IG statements is the issue revolves around GGP publicising P1 reserves for the entire acreage when we didn't have rights to all the intervals. Not sure if they implied we could book the full P1 or if they left that up to our imagination. Either way their would be an 'reasonable' expectation that GGP owned the P1 reserves stated.

But legally they then say:
"COMPETENT PERSONS STATEMENT: The information in this
report has been reviewed and signed off by Mr Mark Decker, Geologist (BS. Geology), with over 34 years respective relevant experience within oil and gas sector.

This report contains forward looking statements that are subject to risk factors associated with resources businesses. It is believed that the expectations reflected in these statements are reasonable but they may be
affected by a variety of variables and changes in underlying assumptions which could cause actual results or trends to differ materially, including but not limited to: price fluctuations, actual demand, currency fluctuations, drilling and production results, reserve estimates, loss of market, industry competition, environmental risks, physical risks,legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments, economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions, political risks, project delay or
advancement, approvals and cost estimates"

So it seems the first person to blame is the competent person. Then if yo blame GGP they have probably absolved themselfs with their disclaimer.

I note that although they tick off the delay box and the reserves estimates, they did fail to tick the legal box in their disclaimer. But I guess that is where they argue that AKW indemnified them.