RE: Latest RNS14 Mar 2025 09:29
Wobble, Kenj is correct about the EIA. The reason AST resisted submitting an EIA was that they held the view that “stimulation” was not “fracking” the Slovenian authorities disagreed with that view, as do many others.
In my view, there was a level of arrogance and stupidity in AST as they had submitted an EIA for their operations some years earlier, during Colin Hutchinson’s tenure about a decade back.
They could have made appropriate revisions to that and submitted it at very little cost.
The current arbitration proceedings will, no doubt, be taking a view on what does, or does not, constitute “fracking” and potentially agree with the government’s decision.
I agree with you that the litigation funder, Enyo Law, must feel there is a case there but my limited research on their past performance has shown that they have not always been successful.
I wish you luck with your gamble but it is, in my view, an extremely high risk punt.