Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Have you heard anything positive?
There was an injustice here - but always thought that the odds of us winning were getting lower and lower, the more and more I read about the persoennel involved. Always thought it wasn't going to be about the Law, but about lawyer power.
SO are we back in action?? :o))
The fat lady hasn't sung just yet mate. ;)
Are we getting anything for our shares holding? Are they doing an asset match like LDP? Can't believe I lose all here.
Has the company formally been de-listed? If so, I will registered my losses so I can offset any CGT in the future
So what does this mean guys for shareholders? Had an RNS Alert this morning as well but no link to info!! What was that all about?
Thanks to guys on ADVFN for views, & to yourself for posting link. BDO link brought forwards: https://www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/oxus-gold-plc BW
There was a meeting yesterday. Loads of chat on advfn http://uk.advfn.com/stock-market/london/oxus-gold-OXS/share-chat
Got an alert warning this morning..then can't find an Rns?
.. and he's gone. Will the world miss him? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37253028
Thanks. Sorry, I can't guarantee to be able to read everything - indeed, I couldn't read anything to do with OXS for more than a year. There is no point in me posting until I have read all the documents I should have: Insolvency Law - the relevant Acts of Parliament to estimate the right level of fear I should have about the administrators running the show what with their £500 per hour business costs, and about what duties, if any, they have to the residual risk takers (us?), and how they can be made, if at all, to balance the interests of the different creditor types; French Law on the grounds for overturning arbitral awards (Les recours contre les sentences arbitrales?); All the examples of successful overturnings of Uncitral awards in France (annulations de sentences arbitrales) where France was the siege d'arbitrage; (I know a little about the Tapie case against Credit Lyonais) Studying the Tapie case is to restore my psychological well being as well as to learn a lot of useful French business and legal language (the highs and lows of the Tapie case are so extreme there seem to be no parallels in our Anglo Saxon world (or maybe I am just ignorant about similar cases here?): he had ambitions to be president of France, he was a media star, he had friends in high places on both the left and right of politics, he was made bankrupt, he spent time in prison and then after bankruptcy he was awarded 400+ millions of Euros in an arbitration award, only for it to be ordered to be paid back by the cour d'appel and later by the cour de cassation (Supreme Court?); Read our arbitral award (i.e. the bits I have not wanted to read) and see whether it violates le principe de contradiction or un ordre public. Work out why two French speaking "QC or High Court Judge" equivalents, both with distinguished careers, would make a ruling that apparently breaks French law; Discard my theories that don't stand up to scrutiny by other people attending the meeting on 12/9/16 (i.e. RW, Pug, Nick2412, et al. An interesting Youtube video is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmZg8bBLMAo where you see a re-enactment of un coursier (a motorcycle courier is the cultural equivalent here?) deliver an arbitral award to Tapie's lawyers' office (61 Rue de Miromesnil) take place in the first few minutes, where the commentator explains about the lawyer turning straight to relevant page to read about the award of 400m euros or whatever. The highs and lows of Bernard Tapie seem more extreme than anything I have suffered so, and I am greatly encouraged by any meeting organised by any of the staff of Oxus, even if there is nothing they can technically do at present to rectify the injustice we seem to have suffered (some recognition of contributory fault by the Uzbeks to the failure of the financing without any corresponding compensation being awarded surely must be a violation of le principe de contradiction, but WDIK?
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/30/asia/islam-karimov-uzbekistan-leader-stroke/
Good to see you back Nobull.
At a guess, it might mean the Uzbeks aren't even paying Calunius, the litgation funders, any of the award because the Uzbeks want to deduct the $10m debt they allege Oxus owes them off the Award first. i.e. there is not going to be any payout to any creditors, even to Calunius (who are ahead of us shareholders in the payout queue), unless a new much larger award is obtained. Am not a lawyer or insolvency practitioner, but that is my reading of it. The prescribed part must be something that the administrators have to do by law as part of the administration process, I wonder?
Item 8 Prospect for creditors.... Reads Under Section 176A of the Insolvency Act 1986, where after 15 September 2003 a company has granted to a creditor a floating charge a proportion of the net property of the company must be made available purely for the unsecured creditors. The Company has not granted a floating charge to any creditor after 15 September 2003 and consequently there will be no prescribed part in this administration. Except to the extent that the Company is successful in obtaining a partial annulment of the arbitration decision and subsequently obtains a significantly larger award in a further arbitration, there is no prospect of funds becoming available for distribution to the Company’s preferential and unsecured creditors, or shareholders. The last sentence states " there is no prospect of funds becoming available to unsecured creditors or share holders" Is that legal or am I reading it wrong?
it also states that they can still keep the final award while challenging the ' adverse holdings of the Award that are not compliant with French law' so i guess the question is which parts of the award didn't comply with French law?
Released on the 12th of August They are pursuing the case but not the entire parts only certain parts and BDO cannot give further details. If a larger award or overturn is successful then their may be money to disperse amongst the shareholders. That is my take buy suggest you read The document released by the BDO dated 12th August which is the 6 month legal requirement. The fat lady is not singing just yet. Fingers crossed. Good luck all
Advfn has a lot going on re info for future reference. What now for us apart from patience once again, GLA
shwmae-unless the administrators say something to contrary i won't be writing this off. Normally it don't take 8 months to officially dissolve a company in administration?
what are talking about..
Still a week and a bit to go. Most may not hear a faint heart beat - I can. When we get the diagnosis, we'll know for sure.
Looks like from a review of the BDO report that the $10m is going straight to the litigation funders and there is no chance of an appeal. DEAD. FFS
Can i claim oxs as a loss for CGT purpose now that they are in administration.
Since posting this, the BDO have changed their website, and this statement on the OXUS page (regarding end of August update being posted on it) is no longer present!! I hope it's still applicable though, as it's been a while since any update... GLA.