Just curious. If this is thrown out, as it appears it should, will the SA govt seek to protect itself and companies from what may be Vexatious litigation by ATLA by seeking litigation restraint order against them? (see note at bottom disclaimer)
Context: These are listed companies. This is real wealth being wiped out today. This is the livelihood of dozens of families here and the hard earned wealth of thousands of investors. The future of a community and a town is also on the line. Behind this trial is potentially a billion dollar project that will help lower the price of energy for Australians or provide energy to farmers. Right now there are no doubt plenty of people and contractors and companies probably wondering what they will be doing next week and whether
they will be feeding their kids
Here are the questions I see as pertinent
Q. Has Native Title been extinguished?
Q. Or did it never even apply?
Q. Did they accept consideration in exchange for extinguishing or usage rights?
Q. Do those usage rights permit LCK to do this project?
Q. Were they consulted by LCK during this?
Q. Have they accepted money from LCK in the past?
Q. Did they respond to the public consultation when invited during the consultory period? (obviously they would have if this is so important)
Q. What does
the document they agreed to require them to do when they have an objection or complaint?
Q. Have they followed this protocol?
Q. If not why not?
Q. Why did they choose to do this now?
Q. Has the Minister already responded to them and told them to wait until after the test and to respond during any subsequent Public Consultation Period
Even if this is thrown out of court within 15 seconds, this must send a shiver down the spine of companies, boards and investors of the region. Is your Activity Notification Approval
really watertight? Will a bank fund a BFS or greenlight a project with this risk hovering over their heads
every single day of a projects life? Will contractors mobilise crews and rigs for anything in that region knowing it can be injuncted for possibly no justifiable reason?
This is not actually about LCK, it is just that it is hurting us today
The SA govt is the defendant here, not LCK. The way the court and SA govt respond to this will be very important for investors in SA and whether they risk projects on SA. We would be talking billions, and billions of dollars. I would pretty well sell any share I hold for any company with material exposure to anything within 100km radius of ATLA lands. Why would I risk ATLA doing this to the next company. Will Yuru's sister be asking to heal next week? I would be out of SA altogether if this gets up. Even if it doesn't, do I
really want to risk this for the next investment?
PROTECTION FROM VEXATIOUS LITIGATION
Will the SA govt seek to protect itself from what maybe future Vexatious litigation by seeking litigation restraint order against ATLA? If ATLA are found to be irresponsible in this, and continue to not follow the protocols they may have agreed with or have been instructed to follow, then would it be responsible of the SA govt to protect accountable companies from irresponsible litigation? Too many Jobs, families, livelihoods and futures rely on this to let it happen again.
http://minerals.statedevelopment.sa...athanha_Minerals_Exploration_ILUA_13.2.12.pdf
Important Note
I am now a lawyer and I am not suggesting ATLA or any other party has done anything improper or unjust. I respect their right for legal protection as afforded by law and agreements and for their voice to be heard.
