Agreed with Hebe's interpretation.

Below is the part (poorly) written by the Northern Ontario Business:

"The government wants to weigh in an upcoming appeal launched by Cliffs Natural Resources to overturn a provincial tribunal’s decision that denied the Ohio miner overland access to its Ring of Fire mineral deposit atop another company’s claims.

The Ministry of the Attorney General is seeking permission at the Ontario Divisional Court level, through a motion for leave, to intervene in the appeal of the decision made by the Ontario Mining and Lands Commissioner released last September."

- The first underlined part is fact, CLF wanted the Appeal Court to overturn the Tribunal's decision (which went against CLF). This part should have been written as a stand-alone paragraph. The leading part "The government wants to weigh in" could have been combined with the second paragraph to avoid confusion and misinterpretation.

- The second underlined part (in 2nd para): The wording "to intervene in the appeal of the decision" is too strong. As I understand it the Attorney General want to provide some clarification on the "application/interpretation/intention" of the laws governing the use of lands. The AG staff were quite careful not wanting to give an impression that their appearance at the Appeal Court mean intervention. It's my understanding that there is no need for CLF and KWG to appear, not until the hearing date in June.

There is always a possibility of an out-of-court settlement with CLF dropping the Appeal. Who knows, CLF may want to make up with old friend KWG for some friendly considerationS: slight reduction of the legal fees and time spent by KWG that CLF would have to pay (over $1M) KWG, or selling back the 16% (could be less by now) holding in KWG (current worth = $8.5M), CLF may want to unload its 70%BD as well. Just speculating here folks.

goldhunter