Ann: Central Tanami Project, page-49

Both TAM and MLX announced at the time of publishing the HOA information that it was "subject to conditions".

No HC poster will know the exact terms of those "conditions", but it is not hard to deduce that one of those terms is the "approval of shareholders".

Anyway, the major legal issue at stake here is whether a "contract" was entered into between TAM and MLX. That argument will rest on the element of contract law that relates to "offer and acceptance". The "offer" part seems straight forward and seems no doubt that a legal offer was made. However, if conditions are included then it also seems reasonable that the "acceptance" part is not legal until the conditions of the offer are executed to the satisfaction of both parties.

If so, then no legal contract exists until both "offer" and "acceptance" are completed in accordance with all conditions.

My post is just about the most applicable element of the general law of Contracts that seems relevant in this matter. There might be other clauses in the HOA that apply some special rights or entitlements to MLX. We can only guess about those, but it would be unusual/abnormal to have something over riding the basic elements of Contract Law.

If MLX have a case to mount it would likely be under the general law of Equity rather than Contract Law.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It might be detrimental to the TAM share price in the short term, but in the long term it should go higher due to a better offer one way or the other. It will also be instructive about the ability of the MLX Board. If MLX really want the CTP then IMHO best course of action is to up the offer. The only sure winners from legal action are the lawyers.

Cheers