PN may have waived its rights......
F18 - you bring up a very important issue....
"I find it very interesting that PN offers extensions for several years and then stops playing nice just as the mill is almost finished."
If this is indeed what PN has been doing, they may very well have already abrogated their ability to make a claim (even if it was legit under the contract, which I have doubts about anyway) under the legal principal of Doctrine of Waiver. Even if they had put in the proper language with each grant of extension (something like "by granting this extension, we are not waiving any of our explicit or implicit rights under this contract or under law" - a lawyer would come up with something more precise, but the above conveys the general idea), if they granted extensions multiple times they still may have waived their right to enforce some terms of the contract (specifically, what they are trying to grab back now).
The more that comes out about this attempt to claim jump, the less substance I think there is to PN's case. It would certainly be nice to have some clarification from the company, but there are a lot of potential defects in PN's case and I think that ultimately they will lose. Hopefully the judge dismisses it outright. BTW, are there any provisions for arbitration in the contract ? Because if there are, this will be referred by the courts to an arbitrator immediately.
Anyway, thanks for bringing up an important point, which stirred up my grey matter this morning. At this point, if I had any free cash (I don't), I'd be buying up CPRK shares by the millions at these prices. It's very cheap down here...
M78
AI
