Upcoming Appeal, page-47

No.
Firstly, you posted the first part as fact, not opinion.

Secondly, do you know how the rules go with announcements?
This is what they are:
Companies are subject to continuous disclosure requirements under the 2001 Corporations Act (Commonwealth) and the Listing Rules (which are given legislative force under section 674 of the Corporations Act), in addition to the periodic and specific disclosure requirements.

http://www.magellangroup.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/MFG-Continuous-Disclosure-Policy...

The ASX has described Listing Rule 3.1, known as the continuous disclosure rule, as its most important and ‘cornerstone’ Listing Rule.

It requires that the Company must immediately notify the ASX of:
any information the Company becomes aware of concerning itself that a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or value of the Company’s securities.

The information must be given to the ASX (and an acknowledgement that the ASX has released the information to the market must be received) before the information can be given to any other person or released on the Company’s website.

http://www.healthscope.com.au/index.php/download_file/view/364/197/

So firstly any market sensitive information such as new drill results are reviewed, organised, written up by the exploration manager (in this case) and sent to the ASX. It is then up to the ASX to review the data and release the information back to AVQ before AVQ can release it to the market.

So unless you know where exactly the WG results are at the moment it is not appropriate to be claiming that the results are being deliberately held back or are crap.

In regard to what you said below:
"Appeal is not a full trial, this appeal is to see if a full retrial is warranted."
The Appeal is a full bench i.e 3 Judges. That is a full trial.