A lot will come down to whether AEE are able to go ahead with...

A lot will come down to whether AEE are able to go ahead with vanadium mining while digging up the uranium but putting it back in the ground.

That would lower Aura's claim, say to the lost uranium credits & the costs associated to returning the uranium.

But I doubt if Sweden really wants the uranium dug up at all now, so it might therefore be in Sweden's interests for AEE to leave.

For setting a valuation for Haagan, from what I understand, will go back the valuation of the project at the time uramium was banned; mid 2018.

This was actually around the time the proposed Vanadis IPO was running hot with Peter Reeve touting the projective was conservatively valued between $30~50 million dollars; potentially higher.

Does this figure even include any valuation for the uranium side of the project?

The judges will apply their own formula but Peter's conservative numbers give us some insight.

So as it turns out, the timing of the ban in one way really could not get any better from AEE's point of view.

Max. Val

Of course you're right the case if an amicable settlement were not reached in the next few months, could take years but also interest will be attached to any payout dated from the time of the ban.

Even say 3% of a higher payout could fetch another million plus ontop of damages, applied for each year.

Aura are not in a position to go to court but there are enough shrewd lawyers around to smell huge money and take on the case for free, in return of course for a sizeable share if the booty (30~40%).

We will most likely know the outcome already if Peter finds a skilled lawyer willing to take on the risk.

By the way, you mentioned David vs Goliath; everybody knows who won$

All imo; neither legal or financial advice