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.
Some more to add
In that link Barbara was pictured with a woman named Audrey Mirvish. She is the wife of David Mirvish who is a well known owner of a theatre production company.
He is all over the internet, after a bit of Googling I managed to find this article describing a dinner for “34 friends” hosted by Salah Bachir, the ex president of Cineplex Media , a subsidiary of Cinepkex
https://www.everythingzoomer.com/health/2016/07/08/salah-bachir-says-thank-friends/
I am sure with further digging more could be unearthed
In my view This further suggests she has links to this world and should therefore not have been considered impartial to judge on this case
Sammy18, never underestimate the law to loose, forget or even miss things... and sometimes even break the law themselves.
Obviously not on the same scale as cine, but I know a solicitors practice who are currently being sued for lying to their client. Hiding evidence that made them look bad and withholding a meer £65,000 owed to the client which the lawyer was just gonna keep on top of their fee.
Bb, maybe add this, but I'm sure Cine lawyers are on it.
https://truthlikewater.com/2017/06/13/justice-denied-and-perverted-by-judge-barbara-conway/
Sure OK Mountainous we'll send to Scott. So the evidence we have gathered so far is the article on dodgy Barbara you posted tonight and her knees up with the Plex board photos from HNS. Have I missed anything else ?
Think you might be onto something here, sure doesnt sit right that shes pally with them, real conflict of interest. Must be worth getting those pictures to someone who can have a better look into it.
@HNS, the date and location matches up to photographs of both of them, so there is no doubt that they both attended the same event.
@BlueBuxton, I think perhaps forward to Scott and then we can be sure it will reach Mooky. It is very clear they were both at the same event, this alone should raise a concern as to whether there was truly impartiality or not.
BB , dont you think the Cine spy machine haven't looked into her oast, her circle of friends etc..!!!
They and their lawyers will be on the ball, dont worry about that..
Unless both are reading this bb for tips.
:-)
Thanks HNS, could it be a conflict of interest a judge hearing a case of those within their social circle!?
3.2 ( and 1.1 lol)
https://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/ojc/principles-of-judicial-office/
Photos of Conway in party mode and Phyllis at the same event
Some will argue these photos are from 2017 so what’s the big deal - they clearly move in the same social circles should have been flagged for possible bias
https://www.patrickmcmullan.com/photo/3454687
https://www.patrickmcmullan.com/events/5b3ef4dd9f92906676444a8b
@mountainous Yeah why not we have nothing to loose, maybe send to Scott? Id be in favour of emailing Mooky directly, now having met him I think he'd be very grateful :-)
Do we have Ashley's email too she was very approachable (in fact she approached us lol)
Good Evening Mountainous yeah I'm OK thanks been out all day just catching up, hope you are well too
Sounds like the problem is no one holds Barbara to account! A biased, protectionist and possibly even corrupt judge
I really hope the appeal team are aware of the details of this...!
@BlueBuxton, it actually may not be a bad idea to compile all of this information together and send to CINE for scrutinisation from their legal team. What have we got to lose? There very well may be some sort of process if the defendant (CINE) believes that a conflict of interest exists?
Interesting HNS, I hope Mooky and his appeal team are aware of these cosy Barbara/Plex board photos!
Maybe she was also ambushed by cake at this social event :-)
@HNS, from what I remember, when there is a case in court and a jury is chosen, there is an effort to compose a jury that is as unbiased as possible.
There was the case of Martin Shkreli many years ago (pharma exec, securities fraud) and the court looked high and low to get a proper, unbiased jury, they actually found it difficult to do so because of how well known he was at the time.
Meanwhile, the so-called ‘Superior Court of Justice of Canada’ has allowed a judge with known connections to the plaintiffs to rule upon a high-profile case. Who decided that was a good idea? That is like sending Boris Johnson as a judge on a case about whether one of his cabinet members broke COVID laws or not, it is preposterous.
It is all appears very cosy indeed…
Good evening @BlueBuxton, hope you’re keeping well :)
And yup, the actual judgement document was one of the most frustration things to read, she doesn’t even try to hide it. For Cineworld’s side, she gives close to no benefit of the doubt, but when discussing Cineplex’s side there is a lot of ‘benefit of the doubt’ to dish out.
Fingers crossed the appeal judges see this and reduce the sum, otherwise I will lose a lot of faith in the Canadian justice system. To the best of my knowledge, not one person outside of Cineplex has expressed an opinion that Cineplex will win this appeal. From the commentary I have read (most thanks to HNS), the vast majority anticipate CINE has a good chance of winning, and this is coming from actual legal scholars who have read the judgement in full most likely.
As I mentioned previously before any verdict was given.
Judge Con away were either ending up with a 4 bed penthouse in Toronto, or a 1 bed studio in down town Kafr Aqab....
Stinks to high hell....
Bwtfdik
@Tegop, I am fairly certain that Conway had made her decision halfway through the court proceedings. Even Cineplex was not expecting a result this fast, they were expecting Q1 this year from memory and we got it in Q4 2021, so it was surprising how quickly they came to that conclusion.
@mountainous, I read this article too in my background checks on Conway, alongside the cosy photos of Conway at social fundraising events attended by Cineplex’s board chair.
Nice find Mountainous thanks for sharing, my key take away from that article is:
"Conway ignored all this..."
The real question is, was it coincidence that a very pliable judge was put in charge of a first-of-its-kind civil case between large corporations?
That could explain how some are sure of the decision ahead of time.
@HNS, precisely that, I think everyone knows it’s a lot of baloney now.
I had a read of this story a few months ago and decided I would share here: https://truthlikewater.com/2017/06/13/justice-denied-and-perverted-by-judge-barbara-conway/amp/
This is not the first time she has made a controversial judgement…
‘Why would a senior judge ignore such evidence and come to such a perverse decision? In my opinion one possible answer is that Judge Conway was affected by influences outside the evidence.’ History appears to repeat itself…
@mountainous that’s the dream scenario spelled out right there. Either way it’s going to make history. Barbara wants to be the first judge in the history of M&A expectation damages to ever allow forecast synergies to be a valid way of costing an award …crazy
If we win the court case, this will be £1 by year end imo. This will be a fantastic year for CINE if Cineplex is dealt with fully in my opinion.
I anticipate we will then have a solid 2023, with CINE broadly achieving their base case subject to no further issues with COVID. CINE will begin to deleverage this year, and 2023 will be a year of huge deleveraging and CINE coming down to more reasonable levels of debt. In the process, the interest payments will reduce, and the positive effects of the cost cutting measures will begin to materialise. I anticipate dividends for 2025, perhaps mid/late 2024 if we are lucky.
That is my conservative estimate. If CINE has an extremely fantastic 2022 (Cineplex result being in the region of <$400m and good movie release schedule and results), then MAYBE we could see dividends in 2023, but in reality I expect late 2024-2025 for the dividends.
All in my opinion, let’s hope for the best and prove these shorters wrong!
If CINE win this will "reduce" our debt by $1bn. Taking all the skepticism into account the mcap should at least double.
If we win the case and there no new outbreaks....this could easily be back at a quid.