The man on the grassy knoll, page-14

Here's listing rule 3.1. If a reasonable person would conclude that the info would have a material effect on the share price then the info must be disclosed. Clearly a lengthy delay would have such an impact (and the share price drop on the day of re-listing will validate that). But because they still don't know when it will be fixed and how much it will cost (apart from that it's a long time and will cost a lot) then they had no choice but to suspend. A completely normal response and I would have done exactly the same in their shoes. You can't keep trading when you don't know when you will be drilling again and how much the downtime will cost. Has anyone spoken to Cath today?
++++
3.1 Once an entity is or becomes aware of any information concerning it that a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or value of the entity’s securities, the entity must immediately tell ASX that information.
3.1A Listing rule 3.1 does not apply to particular information while each of the following requirements is satisfied in relation to the information:
3.1A.1 One or more of the following 5 situations applies:
 It would be a breach of a law to disclose the information;
 The information concerns an incomplete proposal or negotiation;
 The information comprises matters of supposition or is insufficiently definite to warrant disclosure;
 The information is generated for the internal management purposes of the entity; or
 The information is a trade secret; and
3.1A.2 The information is confidential and ASX has not formed the view that the information has ceased to be confidential; and
3.1A.3 A reasonable person would not expect the information to be disclosed.
Compliance with Listing Rule 3.1 is critical to the integrity and efficiency of the ASX market and other markets that trade in ASX quoted securities or derivatives of those securities. Reflecting this, Parliament has given the rule statutory force in section 674 of the Corporations Act.
If a listed entity breaches Listing Rule 3.1, it may also breach section 674(2). This is a both criminal offence and a financial services civil penalty provision, punishable in the former case by a fine of up to $110,000 and in the latter case by a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000. Alternatively, if ASIC has reasonable grounds to suspect a breach it may, by administrative action, issue an infringement notice imposing a penalty of up to $100,000. The entity may also be liable to pay damages to any person who suffers loss or damage as a result of the breach.
An officer who is involved in such a breach may infringe section 674(2A) of the Corporations Act. This is a civil penalty provision punishable by a penalty of up to $200,000. The officer may also be liable to pay damages to anyone who suffers loss or damage as a result of the breach, although there is a due diligence defence in section 674(2B), which protects officers of a listed entity from civil penalties and civil claims for damages if they can prove that they took all steps that were reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that the entity complied with its continuous disclosure obligations and, after doing so, believed on reasonable grounds that the entity was complying with those obligations.
It should also be noted that an officer or employee of a listed entity who gives, or authorises or permits the giving of, materially false or misleading information to ASX under Listing Rule 3.1 (including in response to any enquiry ASX may make of the entity under that rule) may commit a criminal offence under section 1309 of the Corporations Act.