Thanks Rocklicker.

We can notice a slight change of wording in the section referring to the easement application by Cliffs. But KWG's point is still expressed very clearly: can a partner be allowed to 'expropriate' his co-partner's surface rights for the purpose of developing its wholly-owned property? (Perhaps, maybe! But I suspect that if the MNDM does grant the easement to Cliffs, opening the way to develop Black Thor -and not Big Daddy- using KWG's surface rights, there will be ground for a serious civil action by KWG against its sroungy partner. The battle is probably just beginning...)

"Recently, Cliffs has made application under the Public Lands Act for an easement to build a road for the purpose of developing Black Thor, over the surface of the very same mining claims KWG intends to bring to lease. KWG had previously completed a preliminary economic assessment of the Big Daddy project to comply with the requirements of the Ontario Securities Act for public disclosure of the discovery’s economic merits. The Cliffs application to the Ministry of Natural Resources, which administers the Public Lands Act, requires consent from KWG pursuant to the provisions of the Mining Act for the use of the surface over the mining claims. Such consent was denied by KWG and the matter was referred to MNDM, which administers the Mining Act, and under the provisions of which KWG staked the mining claims and conducted assessment work. MNDM referred the matter to the Mining and Lands Commissioner of Ontario. The Commissioner then ordered that Cliffs provide KWG with the applicant’s case and evidence, so that KWG might have an opportunity to respond in a full hearing before the Commissioner."

GLTA.

BaBe.