here is a good article that came out recently: The ministry...

here is a good article that came out recently: The ministry respond to a question about pre1979 mining concessions for lithium.

"

The Ministry of Mining thus responds to Pulso regarding the validity of these properties: "Since 1983 (after the promulgation of the Mining Code) concessions have been granted for minerals other than lithium,since as of 1979lithiumwas declared an inconceivable mineral.The belongings after 79 that have not expired, are in force.The strategy defines that the companies that develop the exploration stage with the State will have a preferential right to associate in the exploitation stage."The State cannot make a clean sweep with these belongings," says an actor with an interest in the matter.The 2015 report from the NationalLithiumCommission said that the mining properties ofCorfo,Codelcoand Enami covered half the surface of the Chilean salt flats.The other half supports the optimism of the private sector.
"


Also today I was looking for other related court cases. I found a court case in the Copiapo appeals court case number 566-2022. which started after the final judgement on case 484-2020 . Final judgement for case 484-2020 came on October 28th 2022. which was the same day that undersecretary Willy started to talk about the attempt to extend the CEOL in maricunga and the metal vs non-metal argument against pre-1979 mining conessions. The 484-2020 case is MSB suing the state defense council, the main defendant is the Treasury. From what I can tell about this lawsuit is MSB sued to get a mining easement for some of its properties that boarder the CEOL that CODELCO was granted. MSB sued to get easements like SIMCO has. On 10/28/2022 the judgement ruled in favor of MSB getting mining easements. Then immediately after this the defendant appealed the judgement to the Court of appeals in case number 566-2022 which is where the case is now. As off 4/25/2023 the all of the judges are in agreement about the ruling for case 566-2022, and a judgement is expected any day. Due to the recent supreme court ruling, related to very similar matters, that went in favor of MSB I think that this ruling will also be in favor of MSB.

So this case is good imo because it shows how MSB is trying to further de-risk and solidify the legal situation around its mining concessions.