Well thats just the thing - quite a few here believe its not...

Well thats just the thing - quite a few here believe its not that ownership dispute per se that is the reason behind the suspension, but the lopping off of a section of the tenement from our proposed exploitation licence. The suspension could still be tied in with the wider disputes with Zijin and/or Dathomir, or perhaps not. It could simply be that someone (like the AJM/cominiere partnership) is attempting to wean their way into into a chunk of what was formerly under our licences, and the other disputes coming to the fore at the same time is coincidental to the suspension, which fell after the ministerial decree led to the apportioning of surface rights dues from CAMI. We don't know, because we haven't been informed. Its poor communication, even if that choice is strategic.