Ann: Central Tanami Update,NST-TAM.AX, page-18

The MLX angle is simple, the MLX shareholders have lost out on significant value because of the TAM board endorsing the NST proposal. The TAM directors promoted it as a better deal without consideration for the pending claim against TAM by MLX.

What is present in the NST HoA and not in the MLX HoA is that the proposal is to be put to shareholders 'subject to a receiving a superior offer'. Meaning that when TAM was approached by NST and received what it considered to be a better offer it was still bound by the MLX HoA.

If the TAM directors wanted to better protect the interests of their shareholders they would have been better off having that clause in included in the MLX HoA. The directors of TAM wanted that deal to go ahead and quickly, they wanted it to be binding and to ensure MLX couldn't back out. You can't have it both ways.

MLX is doing the right thing by it's shareholders by trying to uphold their interests. If you need any evidence to suggest that this will drag on, just look at the ABY hostile takeover Cookie just completed.