settlement

There has been some discussion about whether the deceptive and misleading conduct case in the Federal Court will continue despite the settlement reached in the SA Supreme Court regarding the NTMA.

Firstly, you should understand that there are no limits on what can be reached during a mediation. A mediation is not bound by the orders sought during the substantive proceedings. Therefore, AGS could have sought a lot more than what they did in the orders. So we should not assume that AGS only sought or agreed upon the remedy reflected in the orders.

It may be the case that the Supreme Court proceedings were settled on the condition that the misleading and deceptive conduct case is discontinued (a condition precedent that is confidential). In other words, it is subsumed in the Supreme Court settlement. There does not have to be a separate settlement in the Federal Court.

It is my view that the misleading and deceptive conduct case will be settled on terms of confidentiality. Heathgate/Quasar do not want the details of the allegations becoming public, which would include the real size of the Four Mile tenement. Furthermore, the deceptive and misleading conduct allegations are very serious and have wider ramifications for Heathgate/Quasar and their directors. I believe they would want this matter wrapped up nice and tight whilst they have the opportunity to do so. In my experience, if there are a number of legal proceedings between parties they settle them altogether. They don't generally leave matters outstanding because it doesn't resolve the issues in totality between the parties.

Its not uncommon for settlements to be on terms of confidentiality so I wouldn't go alleging AGS are trying to cover things up. I believe Heathgate/Quasar would be the instigator of this. In light of their "private company" status, they don't want too much on the public record.

The fact that proceedings are still technically on foot doesn't mean they are likely to be ongoing. It merely means the parties can finalise the settlement and advise the court once that has occurred. Once the conditions precedent have been met and the settlement finessed, the plaintiff (AGS) are likely to file a notice of discontinuance so that the proceedings are formally terminated.

Personally, I can't believe the market hasn't read between the lines with the settlement announcement. The outcome couldn't be more obvious.....

AGS commenced proceedings, fought for a couple of years...do you think they would settle on terms that are not favourable to them?????