@cfp ........" the company has been in suspension for 8.5 months...

@cfp ........" the company has been in suspension for 8.5 months because of the ASX changing goal posts then adding new ones in"

This is purely the company's fault, not the ASX. The ASX is totally into legal ar$e covering. All BODs of all companies know (or should know) this.

If WFE instead of announcing we are changing what we do in a major way, ie the gung ho approach, to instead ....................
'we are going to do a full feasibility study on changing course', the ASX would not have had an issue.

A DFS would have had independent experts (acceptable to ASX) work out all the intricacies for the company of the new path, without ever being in suspension.

By going the bull at a gate approach, the ASX has basically said 'to much change without any independent scrutiny to see if it is feasible', please do a prospectus. Following the guidelines of a prospectus getting independent experts to write reports on all aspects where the guidelines talk "reasonable grounds", would easily pass ASX scrutiny.
WFE should IMO never have bothered to ask for 'in-principle advice', because the guidelines clearly cover what WFE need to do.

Basically by trying to cut corners WFE have run into walls.