I’m feeling confused. They mention offshore but reading into it, it appears to be onshore. Also, they mention that the company did get a lease, so how are they infringing on the land if they got a lease? Is it because they went deeper than the “assumed” 6 feet that are normally included in the “surface” rights? Either way, I am happy that they got their fingers slapped, I just wish I had more clarity in the case as the information provided is quite ambiguous in my opinion.
Offshore is another term for foreign owned.
I’m feeling confused. They mention offshore but reading into it, it appears to be onshore. Also, they mention that the company did get a lease, so how are they infringing on the land if they got a lease? Is it because they went deeper than the “assumed” 6 feet that are normally included in the “surface” rights? Either way, I am happy that they got their fingers slapped, I just wish I had more clarity in the case as the information provided is quite ambiguous in my opinion.
Believe this facility is onshore.
Yes!