Would this case not be more complicated tha a two month case and more likely take the form of a multi-stage and multi-hearing process?

There is only one stage, with a possible pre-hearing conference and multi-hearing process, under the tribunal of Linda Kamerman, the Mining Commissioner, of the OMLC, who decides matters for the MNR and MNDMF, based upon the Mining Act, Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, Aggregate Resources Act, Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Act, Ministry of Natural Resources Act, Conservation Authorities Act and the Aggregate Resources Act.

Cliffs aspires to construct a private road...I can see the violation of private interests for the greater public good as in the case of an expropriation, but what about infringing on private interests for other private interests?

Infringement? It will be a public/private road paid for in part by the Ontario government, for the greater public good of thousands of jobs, millions in provincial tax revenue for 100 years.

As well, I think it of interest to decipher between settlement and decision. A settlement could be negotiated between the parties likely with the assistance of some form of mediation services while a decision would come from some governing body. I am not sure what a KWG/Cliffs negotiation and attempt at settlement would look like....in some ways they have opposing views yet Cliffs has an ownership stake in KWG. Odd dynamics to say the least.

Cliffs had to take ownership in KWG to stop development of Big Daddy. Cliff only negotiates settlements when no other options are available. Cliff's and McGuinty will make the deal: The Crown to impose restrictions on KWG's mining claims to use portions of the surface rights for public benefit. Ontario will give Cliffs preferential electrical rates and money for the ITS and Cliff's will put the $3.3B project all in Ontario.