Proposed action against Aus Streaming 

  1. We are informed that various representations may have been made to investors ( including you?) ,which may lead to possible legal claims.
  2. If you would like to participate in the class action, please provide us with details of your investment/s ( click the “Expression of interest” button below).

Overview of this action

We represent investors who wish to take a class action against Aus Streaming Limited.

If you invested in Aus Streaming at the relevant time/s (through an entity with which you are/were associated ) and would like to join the class action, please read below.

You will not be required to contribute to any legal or other costs, including adverse costs in the proceedings nor will you  be the named plaintiff.

The upside is that you will receive a pro rata percentage of the settlement or judgment and all that you need to do is express your interest and provide requisite details.

If you wish to understand more of the claim, please select your choice of document from the list on the left of this page or continue to read below

By expressing your interest, you merely assist in taking this to the stage where a funder may become interested. 

Funders have their own respective terms of engagement which we will provide once the claim proceeds. 

In addition, our fees will form part of the funder’s percentage of the Court sanctioned settlement or judgment. 

To reconfirm, the class of plaintiffs (you) will not be required to contribute to any legal or other costs, including any finding for adverse costs 

Further details of the claim etc

What is “Aus Streaming”?

  1. “Aus Streaming” refers to a group of companies which includes:
    1. ASAF Mining Royalties Limited (incorporated in Gibraltar);
    2. ASAF Critical Metals Limited (incorporated in British Colombia, Canada) (ASAF);
    3. Aus Streaming Investments Limited (incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands) (ASIL);
    4. Aus Streaming Limited (In Liquidation) (ACN 600 577 384) (incorporated in Australia) (ASL);
    5. Infrastructure Commodities Limited (incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands); and
    6. Infrastructure Commodities (Mauritius) Limited (incorporated in Mauritius).
  2. This group of companies was purportedly established for the purpose of providing metal streaming services to the Australian critical metals market.  To enable entry into the Australian critical metals market, it was represented to investors that ASIL would be acquired by the publicly listed company Murchison Holdings Limited (ACN 004 707 260) (MCH) by way of a “reverse merger” to enable a “back-door listing” on the Australia Securities Exchange (ASX).  Following the Australian Securities and Investments Commission raising concerns with this – given that ASIL was incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands – it was represented to investors that MCH would acquire the Australian-based company ASL instead.

Representations made to investors

  1. Our investigations have revealed that various representations were made to investors to entice them to purchase shares in ASAF (being ASIL’s and ASL’s parent company), ASIL, ASL, or other “Aus Streaming” related companies.  The representations that were made included that:
    1. ASAF shares were available for purchase due to a sale of distressed assets by a reluctant shareholder (to the value of $500,000);
    2. the distressed ASAF shares could be purchased for 10 cents each;
    3. “Aus Streaming” would be listing on the ASX by way of a reverse takeover by MHL;
    4. upon ASIL and/or ASL being acquired by MCH, investors in ASAF would receive:
      1. one share in MCH, that would be listed at 20 cents; and
      2. one share in a company referred to as “T One Resources” (or TOR Mining Capital Limited) that had an ascribed value of 28 Euro-cents and would be listed on a European stock exchange;
    5. “Aus Streaming’s” shareholder provided an asset base of 88 cents per share, which assets would be sold down and reinvested in streaming contracts;
    6. there was the opportunity for purchasers of ASAF to receive a five (5) times return on investment on the basis that the minimum value of “Aus Streaming” was 68 cents per share;
    7. ASAF had assets of approximately $500M, of which $200M would be vended to “Aus Streaming”;
    8. the figures referred to in paragraph 5(g) had been audited by a London firm;
    9. “Aus Streaming” would create exponential shareholder returns within 24 months due to extremely favourable market conditions for streaming companies;
    10. T One Resources was spun out from a private equity fund to create a separate public company to take advantage of market conditions in the mining sector and acquire and develop tier one mining assets;
    11. ASL’s financial report for the year end September 2016 recorded that it held investments of $138,566,155, which was audited by Nexia Perth Audit Services Pty Ltd (Nexia); 
    12. ASIL’s financial statements as at 30 June 2015 recorded that it held investments of $224,967,440, which was audited by BBK Partnership Chartered Accountants;and
    13. The purported same number of limited shares (value $500,000) were arguably offered to numerous investors , one of which may have been you?
  2. These representations may have given investors cause to invest in “Aus Streaming”.  However, for the reasons discussed below, it appears that none of these representations were effectively true.  Indeed, MCH never acquired ASIL and/or ASL.
  3. In addition to the “Aus Streaming” group of companies, investors may have been enticed to acquire shares in other related companies by way of representations similar to those referred to in paragraph 5.  Those other companies include AGB Resources Capital Limited, APA Energy Streaming Limited, IFH Resources Limited, TOR Mining Capital Limited, OTH Mineral Streaming Limited, Frontier Mining Value Limited, Indus Infrastructure Partners Limited, Indus Infrastructure Partners 1 LP and Quantum Investing Management Limited.
  4. The representations referred to in paragraph 5 are not an exhaustive list.  Other representations may have been made to you (or your associated entities) to entice investment in a company associated with “Aus Streaming”.  Please inform us if other representations were made to you as it will enable us to consider all potential legal claims.
  5. Likewise, the companies referred to in paragraphs 3 and 7 is not an exhaustive list of related companies.  
  6. PwC’s findings

    On 3 May 2021, PwC published a detailed report to ASL’s creditors on the affairs of ASL. Significantly, that report concluded that there had been a systemic and deliberate attempt since at least 6 September 2016 to mislead ASL’s external stakeholders as to the value of the investment assets held by ASL.

    If you wish to view the PWC report please click here

    This conclusion was reached by PwC as, amongst other things:

    (a) PwC was not able to establish any credible and independently verifiable information supporting the substance and financial position of the companies that comprised ASL’s investments;

    (b) the most recent purported independent valuations – which were commissioned by ASAF – did not conform to normal valuation practices, were not prepared by a qualified valuer, and were not independent; and

    (c) it observed what it considered to be “a deliberate opaqueness to the structure, management and business activities of what appears to be a large group of interconnected organisations, registered in a number of jurisdictions spanning the globe”.

If you were enticed to invest in another company related to “Aus Streaming” we are interested to know.

We cannot see a downside but if you have any questions or queries, please contact Geoff Sandler of Claims Administration Australia on 0419 709 107 or

Expression Of Interest