Spare us please as he is a related party and should be ignored as past postings and consequent discovery have proven that he is talking his own horse up here. KDR had nothing to do with the tenement expenditures as it was under the control of the Administrators for Convergent Minerals Ltd at the time. CVG were the previous holders of the MT Holland tenements and went into receivership followed by delisting from the ASX.
It is all a hail mary shot by the plaintiffs to get a cash grab based on a technicality caused by a failure in oversight by the Administrators to keep the tenements in good standing. This all happened prior to KDR ever being involved in Mt Holland. The Warden's Court obviously needed to uphold the technicality of the law regarding exemptions for minimum lease expenditures. However, I'm confident that the Minister will use the common sense rule to make a decision and it is highly unlikely that any forfeiture will be given in favour to a couple of opportunistic cowboys and a cowgirl.
The plaintiffs have been gunning for a settlement since day dot and KDR have not been prepared to give into such an opportunistic threat IMHO.
As I understand, there was a token settlement offered early on; but the 2 pound company registered in the UK got greedy and wanted more. C'est la vie.
Cheers
