what next, page-28

imperatore,

CHM are going for a lot more than just half a million. That figure is roughly the amount which CHM allegedly gave the former incarnation of MMX to buy the Jack Hills mine.

There are those who say that at best, CHM would be entitled to that amount back (plus interest) and that's the best they're going to do out of this.

Then you have the raiders of the lost ark who think that CHM is going to get half the Jack Hills mine at the end of the court case. Which would be more like 500 million rather than 500 thousand.

So we have two camps, each of whom think they're on a winner. Like I said before, my money is on MMX.

People who support CHM refuse to accept certain facts and/or brush over some very crucial facts.

Time and time again, people say Mitsubishi isn't going to part with more dollars until the court case is resolved. I remind those people again: Mitsubishi were fully aware of the existence of that claim. Don't forget that CHM had already made their intentions to sue MMX fully known to the ASX last year.

This was after the June announcement about Mitsubishi coming on board, however at that stage MItsubishi had not signed any documents nor parted with any cash to MMX.

Subsequent to CHM announcement about litigation, Mistubishi still signed on at a signing ceremony in Tokyo, and then made their first payment.

I simply refuse to accept that Mitsubishi did not do their own due dilligence before signing anything. So here we come back to the knowing all the facts question.

Unlike you and I, Mitsubishi has had access to all the details of the case, including CHM's claim. So why are people still harping on about Mitsubishi not making any more payments because of CHM matter ??

Further payments by Mitsu are dependent on an increase in proven ore reserves, not the CHM claim.

And as far as continually going on about AH not risking their good name on a case which has no merit, or (my favorite one) they'd get in serious trouble if they took out a statement of claim which was false: These are just plain wrong and very ignorant assertions.

A law firm is simply acting on the instructions of their client. So if CHM told them a very embellished version of the truth, then that's what AH will take to the court room.

Unless they fabricate any evidence themselves, there can be no recourse against them if CHM lose. That's how these things work.

And as far as those who think that AH are the greatest lawyers in the country and therefore there's no way that CHM can lose with them on their side, here's a little food for thought:

If the caliber of your lawyers is part of the argument as to why CHM will win, then have a listen to this.

About three weeks ago there was a feature publication in the Fin Review, where a panel of experts from all over the world ranks Australian Law firms as well as individual lawyers.

The AFR then print a 10-12 page liftout where they name the top lawyers in every field from family law to resources to litigation etc etc.

There's a list of the top 20 law firms in the country, and then there's a list of the top lawyers in every field, which adds up to about 500 or so lawyers who are named as the best.

Interestingly, Freehills (who are MMX lawyers) were rated No. 2 in the whole country. AH were nowhere to be seen in the top 20 !!!

Then in the individual top lawyer rankings, Freehills had their people named in almost every category. How many of AH people were named as the top guns in their field among those 500 lawyers ??? Not one !!

In fact, in that 12 page feature, there was not a single reference to AH as being the top guns in any field.

So if anyone wants to keep using AH as their beacon of faith, get yourself a copy of that lift out and have a read, and you'll soon realise that they're not the top gun in the legal world. Yes, and Freehills are No.2 in the whole country.

I can hear you guys typing already, rushing to tell me what top clients and top cases AH have on their books.

I'm not claiming that they're useless, I'm just pointing out that if you're going to use AH legal talent to argue merits of CHM case then please consider legal talent of Freehills as well.

And before you start rubbishing the AFR published survey get yourself a copy and look at the panel of experts and the ranking criteria. Very interesting reading...

One more thing. There is a March 31 deadline for AH to take up their 40mil 0.5c options. I'm very curious to see if AH are actually going to shell out $200 thousand for the rights to represent CHM.