BB

Your post says: "I think it likely CLf realise this appeal 'decision' stands on expremely shaky ground, and they are possibly liable for the damage caused to KWG and the public interest(ONTARIO NORTHLAND??) by their obstructive behaviour."

It's unlikely that CLF would proceed with building a private road for the development of BT since it has put the project on ice due to its financial trouble (where would they get $3.3B for this development). In the original proposal they would spend $0.6B (with a matching fund of $0.6B supposedly promised by the former Premier of Ontario). Now, the new CLF CEO/Chairman said the project is dead and there is zero chance for the chromite development in the RoF. It would be interesting to see if Minister Gravelle is seeking a confirmation from CLF that its chromite development project is now dead, and that CLF has no intention to build the private road on KWG claims despite the appeal decision in its favour (but it would need to compensate KWG for the money KWG has spent on these claims and potential loss of future business opportunity). Not sure if CLF, on its own free will, would go back to the court to request that its appeal be dropped (is this allowed by the court?), or at least could CLF declare that it would have no intention to take advantage of the appeal decision, hence free itself from the propect of being asked by KWG for compensation. Perhaps Frank could force CLF hand by posing a point blank question to CLF demanding an answer. Or, it could go through the court system requesting that the appeal decision be put aside, since CLF is broke and has no resource to start a $3.3B project, given its current financial status and recent comments from CLF CEO. If lawyer Frank really wanted to play hard ball, then he could take CLF to court asking for compensation for loss of future business opportunities by CLF obstructive behaviour. It would make a stronger case to bring ONTC along, as indicated, for their loss of their business opportunities (~500 Canadian jobs on the line).

What about the Gov of Ont, would it also be liable for creating this log jam? How could it say helping CLF (a foreign company) to build a private road, at the expense of a much smaller Canadian company, would serve Canadian public interest?

Perhaps better informed legal minds in the room may want to wade in with some legal maneuver to undo this log jam?

goldhunter (no lawyer)