AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
LithiumKing
Regular
Just my thoughts. Didnt AVZ apply for the SEZ for Manono, so has the SEZ been approved for AVZ? Thus inferring that they will be given the mining license?
Carlos Danger
Top 20
Retrobyte
Hates a beer
I wonder if Tommy has any lithium holdings, and whether he has reported that to his employer?
www.afr.com
Nine Publishing Charter of Editorial Independence | The Australian Financial Review | AFR
Nine Publishing Charter of Editorial Independence
Attachments
The Dathcom and @AvzMinerals PE Dossier risks tarnishing the image of the country as was the case for the First Quantum Minerals dossier for which the DRC, Ventora and Dan Gertler have innocently paid a high price since 2017 to date. Patriotic reminder without propaganda or flattery
DiscoDanNZ
Regular
Fucken Tommy fucken Twotbag.
When is this guy going to learn that his false articles are just going to be picked to shreds or is the AFR allowing for the clickbait?
When is this guy going to learn that his false articles are just going to be picked to shreds or is the AFR allowing for the clickbait?
AVZ as the developer of the SEZ, would be eligible to additional benefits from the Congolese government as opposed to being purely an investor in the SEZ.
Carlos Danger
Top 20
Nine to pay $545k after defaming PNG minister
Nine will have to pay $545,000 to Papua New Guinea politician William Duma over a series of defamatory AFR articles that falsely accused him of corruption.
www.perthnow.com.au
A series of Australian Financial Review articles wove a "false narrative" that Papua New Guinea energy minister William Duma acted corruptly in granting a petroleum licence, a court has found.
On Tuesday, Mr Duma was vindicated in his Federal Court suit against the Nine-owned Fairfax being awarded $545,000 over a series of defamatory AFR articles by Angus Grigg and Jemima Whyte in February 2020.
Justice Anna Katzmann found Fairfax's articles about the politician's involvement in a PNG petroleum licence tender in 2010 and 2011 were not written as a "bare, factual report" but were rather were "replete with errors and misrepresentations".
The articles were "spiced with an account of suspicious circumstances" against the politician, the judge said.
"The ordinary reasonable reader is prone to loose thinking and reads between the lines. And that is precisely what the respondents encouraged them to do. This article was awash with innuendo," she wrote.
In rejecting Fairfax's defence of qualified privilege, Justice Katzmann found the conduct of the publisher was less than reasonable and inexcusable because they did not properly look over the leaked documents handed to them.
"While they may have read the documents, they did not accurately report the contents of many upon which they relied. And they did not always check the facts," the judge wrote.
"They did not take care to distinguish between suspicions, allegations and proven facts. They did not report the substance of Mr Duma's 'side of the story' in relation to all the matters complained of."
JAG
Top 20
Carlos Danger
Top 20
Sounds all too familiarNine to pay $545k after defaming PNG minister
Nine will have to pay $545,000 to Papua New Guinea politician William Duma over a series of defamatory AFR articles that falsely accused him of corruption.
A series of Australian Financial Review articles wove a "false narrative" that Papua New Guinea energy minister William Duma acted corruptly in granting a petroleum licence, a court has found.
On Tuesday, Mr Duma was vindicated in his Federal Court suit against the Nine-owned Fairfax being awarded $545,000 over a series of defamatory AFR articles by Angus Grigg and Jemima Whyte in February 2020.
Justice Anna Katzmann found Fairfax's articles about the politician's involvement in a PNG petroleum licence tender in 2010 and 2011 were not written as a "bare, factual report" but were rather were "replete with errors and misrepresentations".
The articles were "spiced with an account of suspicious circumstances" against the politician, the judge said.
"The ordinary reasonable reader is prone to loose thinking and reads between the lines. And that is precisely what the respondents encouraged them to do. This article was awash with innuendo," she wrote.
In rejecting Fairfax's defence of qualified privilege, Justice Katzmann found the conduct of the publisher was less than reasonable and inexcusable because they did not properly look over the leaked documents handed to them.
"While they may have read the documents, they did not accurately report the contents of many upon which they relied. And they did not always check the facts," the judge wrote.
"They did not take care to distinguish between suspicions, allegations and proven facts. They did not report the substance of Mr Duma's 'side of the story' in relation to all the matters complained of."
View attachment 28952
Stop the press - corporation hires lobbyist!
Similar threads
