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.
Link on Partially Dissenting Opinion;- http://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw7239_0.pdf Found it to be an interesting read. BW
#oxus twitter must be another Oxus company looking for Investment Intern, that's all. But as usual I've probably got the wrong end of the stick. I wish I could just leave this Oxus situation alone but I continually live in hope that someone somewhere will find something we can cling on to. I now and again look in on advfn and lse, I can't go away for good yet, not yet.
Shinyshiny, have just had a look on ADVFN at nick2412 post of 03/5/2016 time 21:18,... thanks for mentioning said post. Also thanks to nick2412 on ADVFN. BW
Over on ADVFN Nick said that he had spoken to someone at the administrators and that they told him that they hoped to get this appeal issue cleared up within a month. That was at the beginning of May. So...
Don't know what you mean Kirstie, please elucidate.
Have a look at #oxus gold, I don't know what it means though.
anyone ??
''m more concerned about possible payments to the majority panel members, from one of the most corrupt regimes in the world.' Or indeed the odd horses head appearing on a pillow during the night.
Apologies John, I see the links now, to the right hand side.
Hi John I registered with law360 using your link and I see the summary by Vidya Kauri, but cannot see any link to any PDF's, am I looking in the wrong place or have they been removed?
care of alcopop on advfn www.law360.com/articles/782954/uzbekistan-escapes-nearly-all-of-1-3b-claims-by-oxus-gold If you register with law360 using the link above, then underneath the summary of the arbitral tribunals judgement are direct links to 2 pdf documents on the law360 site ; the full 400 page Final Award and also Lalondes Dissenting Opinion.
something doesn't dd up here..
as JG says,i would hope the panel and its decisions are policed/scrutenized.lost a lot of money in here,and seems very shifty to me
"The mistake you make, don't you see, is in thinking one can live ( defend a ) in a corrupt society without being corrupt oneself. GEORGE ORWELL, Keep the Aspidistra Flying
morning everyone.i havent read the report,but i get the impression oxus were/are clean as a whistle.how the hell did they end up losing this case.is it really as 1144523 says? or something more ?
I'm more concerned about possible payments to the majority panel members, from one of the most corrupt regimes in the world. The strength of argument in the dissenting opinion cannot simply have been ignored. I wonder who polices the integrity of the UNCITRAL arbitration process. I'm sure that some independent must scrutinize cases when dissenting opinions arise. There was clearly no skeleton in the cupboard for Oxus, and Mr Shead & co have clearly not done anything wrong.
The Uzbeks had the better paid legal team. I guess money talks.
well, it more focusses on the Uzbeks intentionally undermining the due diligence of the chinese government, by carrying at out a number of aggressive actions against Oxus whilst the due diligence was being carried out, including: calling for AGF's liquidation, refusal to gant the mining license and sueing for the outstanding special dividend payment. The latter which only seemed to have occured because Oxus were sensible enough hedge gold price and exchange rate fluctuations. Reads like a stinking turd, and I really can't see how the panel got away with this criminal decision.
says much the same thing. It also says that he would have awarded Oxus 50% of the claim against AGF. How very irritating. Not sure what the link is for the dissenting opinion is, but an image is published on advfn
many thanks .. this bit caught my eye and goes the heart of the matter in my view pg263 "Refusal to approve the Feasibility Study for Phase 2 and to renew necessary licenses: After the completion of Phase 1, Claimant worked on a Feasibility Study for Phase 2, which was eventually issued by WAI in June 2008. According to Claimant, Respondent refused to approve this Feasibility Study, among others, because it claimed the financing of Phase 2 was not sufficiently laid out in the Feasibility Study. However, this put Claimant in a catch-22 position, because Claimant could not obtain financing without first getting its Feasibility Study approved. Thus, Respondent’s refusal to approve the Feasibility Study prevented Claimant from obtaining advantageous financing. In addition, after modifying the regime applicable for issuing mining licenses by Decree No. 76, Respondent refused to renew Claimant’s Exploration, Mining and Cyanide Licences, which caused additional difficulty in obtaining financing and planning for Phase 2. This refusal to issue or renew relevant licenses were all the more serious as Respondent knew that it was hampering Claimant’s chances of securing financing for Phase 2 (Claim. PHB II. 21.08.2014, paras. 103 fol., and thereto included references to earlier submissions). " This will be why the Chinese funding failed to materialise. It seems a very clear matter to me.
Someone posted the award PDF on ADVFN if anyone is interested.
Someone posted the award PDF on ADVFN if anyone is interested.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04056219/filing-history Now updated
Myself having first bought Oxus in 2009,... I am very surprised at arbitration outcome, (geopolitics ?). BW
....its very easy to go 'oh, well if I'd known that, I would have got out'. Everyone is forgetting that two legal teams went through this claim with a fine toothcomb and in particular the Calunius team. They had to make a recommendation of 'likely outcome' to their paymasters and been pretty convincing with their argument. If Oxus were not claiming for sunk costs, what were they going to do, write them off because those Uzbeks were a bunch of nice guys. Can you imagine the fear for personal safety which the Oxus staff must have experienced when a AMG Merc pulled into their yard and a bunch of leather jacketted, sunglass wearing thugs got out. That article is absolute piffle and I give no credibility to the author.