Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
The jurisdictional challenge is based on the procedural requirements set out in the enabling legislation (that the province argues should have been complied with but was not.) The province argues that the change from "unprofitable" to "unprofitable or more unprofitable) was a significant change that required (again, pursuant to the enabling legislation) a public consultation process permitting other stakeholders (including, notably, the government of the day) to provide input.
|
But didnt someone who was actually there and responsible for this indicate that this process did indeed happen? I thought I read that a while ago.
But assuming for the moment that the Government did not get their fair say in regards to the 'last second scummy Enron clause,' they still signed the contract, can this clause be considered voided because one party was irresponsible regarding their due diligence?