Hi Jim;

I have heard nothing yet about the results of yesterday's court appeal by Canadian Superior. In terms of your question it appears that what you are saying is true. However, there is no way of telling how a court would rule on Challenger's "purported" 25% interest seeing as Challenger paid many millions of dollars of its share of the drilling costs up to November. A court would ask why did they pay? The answer is that they were assured by Canadian Superior Energy that they were entitled to 25% of Block 5(c). In civil law this appears to me to be an undertaking and a reliance situation. Challenger undertook to pay for their share of the drilling costs as they were relying on Canadian Superior Energy to provide them with a 25% share. Surely after all the money that they paid Challenger is entitled to something. Consideration (money) changed hands therefore we have an undertaking and a reliance in legal terms. I think Mike Coolen hedged his bets by stating that even if then Challenger was allowed to sell it's 25% share then Canadian Superior will go after the proceeds to get the money owed them. He thus seems uncertain that Canadian Superior will get Challenger's 25% thus preventing Challenger from selling it. Reading between the lines I'm not sure if Mike Coolen is saying this in the affadavit in order to protect Challenger from having BG step in to take over Challenger's 25% due to the default, seeing as BG has paid all the bills under the Receivership order to cover the money owed by both Canadian Superior and Challenger Energy. This could be a ploy on Mike Coolen's part.

There is a great deal of interesting information in Mike Coolen's affadavit in terms of the value of what he estimates Canadian Superior's 25% and untimately 45% share of Block 5(c) to be worth so he must have a pretty good idea of how much gas there is on Block 5(c) that we do not know yet.

Best Wishes; Scott