Login:
Share:
Email Facebook Twitter

Member Info for Siko


Member Since: Sun, 11th Dec 2011

Number of Share Chat Posts (all time): 911
Number of Share Chat Posts (last 30 days): 20

Last Posted: Thu 21:51


Post Distribution over the last 30 days




Thu 21:51


sinner, I think this is what you were looking for.

Here are the details of the new law:

http://www.shorouknews.com/news/view.aspx?cdate=16042014&id=50d79fa0-228d-479a-95f2-55bf580b4485

It is different from the previous one and consists of 3 points:

1) In addition to the contracting parties, it now allows certain people to appeal against the contract (e.g: share holders and other investors who entered the auction for the contract)

2) Courts to refuse cases filed by anyone else not mentioned in point 1.

3) The law will come into force the day following the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.

According to sources, the new law is now deemed constitutional.

A bit more info in the link, let me know if any part was not clear.
Thu 08:30


sinner, this is exactly what's in the media:

-The government decided to separate fortifying contracts from the amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives year 1997, which were prepared by the previous government.

-Last Thursday, the cabinet approved "a draft decision of the president of the republic" related to fortifying the contracts by limiting the appeals on contracts between the government and investors to the parties involved only. (The exact text of this draft decision was not published, so I am not sure if the text is the same as per the one last presented).

-The amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives are still being revised and have not been submitted yet to the cabinet.

-so it looks like this new law to fortify contracts would not be part of the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives 1997
Wed 22:49


I wish I was a holder... but never mind...

I read all the links you kindly posted and searched a couple more, and I do not think it is bad news at all. I actually think it is good news..

Basically the government was going to make amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives year 1997. One of the amendments to that law included point 8 which was the one related to fortifying the contracts by limiting the appeals on contracts between the government and investors to the parties involved only.

Now the government decided to make a separate legislation for point 8, this legislation is totally separate now from the IL amendments and was presented to the cabinet of ministers last Thursday in the form of "a draft decision of the president of the republic" and was approved by the cabinet. This was all over the Egyptian media and here is one link:

http://www1.youm7.com/News.asp?NewsID=1606161#.U070IFcr7IU

As it was presented in the form of "a draft decision of the president of the republic" , this indicates that they are not going to wait for the parliament and that the president will authorize it himself.

On the other hand, the rest of the amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives year 1997 (which do not include the amended point 8 anymore) are still being revised and have not been submitted yet to the cabinet of ministers.

So all the posted articles are correct, the reuters article is correct

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/10/us-egypt-investment-idUSBREA391GN20140410

as it states that the cabinet approved a draft law that limits appeals on contracts between the government and investors to the parties involved only. (It did not mention the amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives). so the article is 100% correct and agrees with what was posted in the Egyptian media and what I explained.

Also the investment minister is also correct as the rest of the IL amendments (the amendments to the Law of Investment Guarantees and Incentives year 1997) are still being revised and have not been submitted yet to the cabinet.

I hope this clears things up...
Sun 08:35


dazz, what happened was that someone posted saying the SAC said the previous ruling would be cancelled when the signed contract is presented, I told him I was not aware of the SAC officially stating that as it was not in any of the court documents I had, then he directed me to CEY quote, which of course we could rely on as it must have been obtained from their lawyers. So I'm not doubting that quote at all.


Sign up for Live Prices
Top Recommended
Hot Chat Topics
Top recommended posters in the last 30 days
Share Price Spacerspacedog293 
Share Price SpacerSpikeyj277 
Share Price SpacerIapetus252 
Share Price Spacerprestonbob251 
Share Price Spacercautioussid250 
Share Price Spacergaryn250 
Share Price Spacerseanhunter249 
Share Price Spacerfalcon123245 




Member Login

Forgotten your password?
Email:

Password:


Don't have an account? Click here to Register Free!




Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.