RE: Bannerman''''s license still in danger??
Is history about to repeat?
This is of great concern.
After countless hours of research, I have sold my BAN (Bannernan) holding.
I will now use these funds to average down my holdings in Extract Resources. This will also give me some peace of mind and greater leverage than BAN could ever give me. Please do not take my word as gospel, use google and conduct your own research.
https://www.theage.com.au/news/business/cazaly-still-up-there-md-marks-bannerman/2007/01/31/1169919403802.html
Cazaly still up there; MD marks Bannerman
Mark Hawthorne
February 1, 2007
Page 1 of 2 | Single page
FULL DISCLOSURE
THE battle between Cazaly Resources and Rio Tinto over the Shovelanna tenement in Western Australia's Pilbara is heading to court in March.
But that hasn't stopped Cazaly's managing director, Nathan McMahon, from eyeing other prized buys — including Bannerman Resources, the uranium explorer that has close friend and fellow Cazaly Resources director Clive Jones on its board.
McMahon has amassed 5,838,502 shares in Bannerman Resources, which at yesterday's closing price of $2.70 were valued in excess of $15 million.
McMahon now controls a 7 per cent stake in Bannerman Resources, which has the promising Goanikontes uranium project in Namibia and other exploration tenements in Botswana.
The uranium find in Namibia, and the rising price of the radioactive metal on global markets, made Bannerman one of the biggest movers on the Australian Stock Exchange last year — it was up 2537 per cent in 2006.
The Bannerman deal has also been sweet for Jones, who holds 7.125 million fully paid shares, 1.35 million options exercisable at 6.67¢ and 4.6 million options exercisable at 10¢.
Bannerman was trading at just 19¢ a share at this time last year.
"It has been an amazing deal," Jones said yesterday. "We never expected the whole uranium market to take off the way it did last year."
But Jones was quick to point out that there is no relationship between Cazaly and Bannerman.
"Our holdings (in Bannerman) are private business assets," Jones said.
McMahon was travelling to China yesterday and could not be contacted.
While Jones and McMahon reap the rewards of their private investments, the pair are still keen on the rights to Shovelanna, which Cazaly snared after Rio inadvertently let its licence expire.
The tenement was handed back to Rio after former WA resources minister John Bowler used his discretion under the state's Mining Act.
Cazaly plans to drag West Australian Premier Alan Carpenter and Bowler into the witness box in its fight to win back Shovelanna.
Cazaly's lawyers have already subpoenaed Rio chief executive Leigh Clifford — after fronting him in a Sydney hotel last year — as well as head of iron ore Sam Walsh.
A judicial review of the Shovelanna decision will begin in the WA Court of Appeal in March.
https://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22324578-643,00.html
Cazaly faces multi-million payout Elizabeth Gosch | August 29, 2007
ALMOST two years to the day after he swooped on a lapsed iron ore lease in the mineral-rich Pilbara, Cazaly Resources managing director Nathan McMahon has lost his battle to wrest control of the Shovelanna tenement from mining giant Rio Tinto.
Cazaly is now facing a multi-million-dollar legal bill and the wrath of investors, as its shares come out of a three-day trading halt this morning, following the Western Australian Supreme Court's dismissal of the mining minnow's bold bid to overturn a WA government decision to terminate its claim on the Shovelanna iron ore tenement.
"This is a horrible result for Cazaly and a horrible result for the mining industry. Clive Jones and I have done business in Africa, Russia and China and I have serious doubts about the ability of junior companies to do business in WA," Mr McMahon said after the decision was handed down.
"Two years ago tomorrow we pegged a tenement. We do that all the time, every company does it all the time.
"We did everything right, but we're in a position where we have to pay for that -- our shareholders have to pay for that. It is patently wrong -- patently and morally bereft."
In August 2005, Cazaly pegged the Shovelanna tenement -- located alongside BHP Billiton's lucrative Orebody 18 -- when Rio Tinto failed to renew its exploration lease on time, blaming a lazy courier.
Shovelanna -- which has an inferred resource of more than 150 million tonnes of iron ore -- had been held by Rio Tinto and its Rhodes Ridge joint venture partners -- Gina Rinehart's Hancock Prospecting and Michael Wright's Wright Prospecting -- since 1981, but the tenement remained undrilled as the partners exploited more valuable resources.
Late last year, Mr McMahon pointed out that the WA government was missing out on about $18 million a year in royalties from the idle deposit.
"Rio has no interest in Shovelanna. It has been zero holes for zero metres since 1986," he said at the time.
Despite an apparent lack of interest in Shovelanna, Rio Tinto appealed against Cazaly's application to now-disgraced resources minister John Bowler, who restored the tenement to the mining giant in April 2006.
Cazaly took the matter to the WA Supreme Court, where yesterday Judges Christine Wheeler, Christopher Pullin and Michael Buss dismissed the appeal.
"The circumstances of this case, when viewed objectively, provided reasonable grounds for the minister to conclude, in the public interest, that the Cazaly application should be terminated," Justice Pullin said in the judgment.
"The minister said the decision would promote investment. Clearly it does this because it gives out a message to the mining community that minor oversights or inadvertence will not lead to unexpected loss of mining tenements by bona fide miners."
Rio Tinto Iron Ore welcomed the Supreme Court's decision.
"This is a good outcome for Rio Tinto Iron Ore, one that endorses the need to develop our assets in the Pilbara according to an orderly, logical time line," chief executive Sam Walsh said.
Association of Mining and Exploration Companies spokesman Ian Loftus said the result was disappointing and could have dire consequences for WA's reputation as a place to do business.
"It is simply un-Australian to have different sets of rules for different players.
"I'd expect that sort of behaviour in Zimbabwe or Venezuela but not here in Australia. Cazaly clearly acted in the spirit and letter of the Mining Act, yet comes out as the loser.
"The people of this state deserve better," Mr Loftus said.
Mr McMahon agreed the decision would be detrimental to the state's -- and possibly the country's -- economic standing.
"I reckon you will see WA's and Australia's profile in the world risk surveys being dramatically increased because of this decision," he said outside the court.
Cazaly has instructed its lawyers to review the Supreme Court's decision with a view to appealing to the High Court.
Any application to appeal to the High Court must be made by September 25.
Cazaly shares have not traded since being placed halted at 56.5c last Friday