Ann: 30 September 2017 Quarterly Report, page-36

Thanks Now Here Man (or is it No Where Man),

I assume you are a lawyer by your confidence in the termination of the agreement.

If you are not then, I would suggest a little caution.

However having been involved in legal matters for over 35 years (no I am not a lawyer but have worked in construction legal disputes around Oz and overseas) my experience is that such confidence has been misplaced on a vast number of occasions.

The termination of an agreement does not immediately mean that the other party is not entitled to restitution or recompense.

The fine print of the agreement would needed to be tested in a court of law for Coolgardie to satisfy itself as to the veracity of its position.

The only trouble with that, is that potential investors will be wary of a possible legal matter causing a distraction and absorbing all their invested funds. Any investor will run miles (sorry kilometres) if they see a potential litigation matter. Too much uncertainty.

I would suggest a matter such as this could cost $300k plus each to wind its way through the courts and potentially 2 plus years. Maybe even more. However the management of Coolgardie are focused on becoming gold miners. But the time that they will lose in dealing with this potential legal matter will drain the life out of them and cost them their hard won capital raising. My guess is that they are not experienced in legal matters and this is usual with miners and construction type people. They only want to dig holes or build stuff. They are ill-equipped to deal with legal matters. They put a lot of trust in the legal fraternity, but fail to realise that lawyers et al are always looking for the next job, win or lose.

I think at this stage BNR has very much deeper pockets than Coolgardie.

This is not to say that Coolgardie may have a perfectly legal right to have taken the action it has without any consequences, but my experiences is that is a brave board to trust a barrister/lawyer who says that it is an open and shut case. Of course barristers say that every day.

So before we start talking about planks and cutlasses my hearty, I suggest amicable discussions are the better strategy for both parties.

What's that on your shoulder?