George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. 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.
And movement seen here today:
https://esaj.tjsp.jus.br/cpopg/show.do?processo.codigo=2S000I22C0000&processo.foro=100&processo.numero=1088747-75.2015.8.26.0100
===[
07/15/2020 Electronic Message (e-mail) Attached
07/15/2020 Joined Office
07/15/2020 Electronic Message (e-mail) Attached
]===
which is the the more up to date (I am not a robot) version of:
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/processos/65368883/processo-n-1088747-7520158260100-do-tjsp
You're not the only one who is a little lost @tomcat. I understand what you are saying and it's a head scratcher. Presumably some decision related to this was made today? Or is it tomorrow? LoL. And what to make on that ruling from the 7th where the judge appeared to partially agree with those trying to argue against the JRP?
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/processos/240043561/processo-n-2213966-5120198260000-do-tjsp
or have I misunderstood? Worth reading the whole process...
@tomcat - This may be of help to you
Prior judgement on this litigation. Reasons why AAF should be included.
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/300804306/trt-8-judiciario-05-06-2020-pg-624?ref=previous_button
What the labour claims are based on.
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/159719081/trt-8-judiciario-05-09-2017-pg-105?ref=previous_button
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/159719521/trt-8-judiciario-05-09-2017-pg-545?ref=next_button
Hope these help, if you aren't already aware of this
what do you make of the amounts... two identical sums... is it a cost that’s been split in half... one half payable by anglo the other half payable by zamin... or is it a charge payable by zamin if they can... but anglo if they can’t... is that zamin or dev... why use the old name if dev... all those entries today has me wondering back into the mine field again... lost...
@Obs - That is what the optimist in me thinks....
The history of that case is the one where they ruled that AAF is responsible for the labour credits too..the details are at the bottom. It nicely corresponds to the escrow amount.
This along with the new attorney...
Also reading all that a few times, again the optimist in me agrees with what @tomcat said in the morning. New attorney to take things to the next stage.
Question is @Cause and indeed anyone, is that R$11.110.016,82 our $2.5m? It would correspond to an exchange rate of 4.4.
@Kiran?
It was first mentioned here:
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/306801896/trt-8-judiciario-14-07-2020-pg-783
===[
1- In view of the content of the certificate of ID b10a041, I grant the request for the extension of time required by the executed ANGLO FERROUS BRAZIL PARTICIPACOES SA to pay or guarantee the execution of the amount of R $ 11,110,016.82. Give science.
2- Intimate the executed ZAMIN AMAPA MINERACAO SA to pay or guarantee the execution, within 48 (forty-eight hours), by public notice.
3- After, return the case to me in conclusion.
MACAPA / AP, July 13, 2020.
]===
Time's up...
Sorry. It was meant to be:
As it says contemplated, it could mean that ad negotia PoA wasn't granted at the time and it is time to get to that stage so a EGM?
My understanding is that power of attorneys can assign specific limits to what the appointed attorney can decide on and even if they need to grant new powers, the an EGM needs to be called.
As it says contemplated, it could mean that ad negotia PoA wasn't granted at the time and it is time to get to that stage so a EGM.
unless it’s a wind up...
clean break... new entity... and all that... not making the same mistake twice... aka anglo...
just wondering why an egm needs to be called in short notice... if dev already has an attorney... appointed 13may2019... i’m thinking dev’s existing attorney is for the purposes of the jrp/existing owners up to the point of transfer of ownership to pba... and we will need our own attorney... a new one... going forward...
I am confused on that Tomcat.
It says "contemplated" in May 2019. I am unable to find anything with regards to power of attorney.
I still see the Donelli, Abreu Sodré e Martins are representing Zamin (there was an update dated yesterday with their names on it).
Do you think the new attorneys are a replacement or they have been tasked with a new power/objective (because some translations say negotia could mean power to authorise sale/purchase) or the current advocates have been granted a new power which was discussed back in 2019?
will the companies new attorney being appointed next week... have the power to transfer the ownership of dev... to pba... or can the company directors do all that themselves...
mrc, If you're going to eat yourself that's the quick way to do it.
I wonder how many?
I've bitten my nails down to the knuckle joints with this share already !
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/306801165/trt-8-judiciario-14-07-2020-pg-52?ref=next_button
Further decision on the case involving AAF that was shared earlier (I think the one involving guarantee being waived).
It does look it Ob.
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/306801893/trt-8-judiciario-14-07-2020-pg-780?ref=next_button
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/306801896/trt-8-judiciario-14-07-2020-pg-783?ref=serp
Her Excellency ANNA LAURA COELHO PEREIRA, Judge of the 3rd MACAPÁ WORK COURT, MAKES, by this NOTICE to all those who see or hear from her, that the executed ZAMIN AMAPA MINERACAO SA is quoted in JUDICIAL RECOVERY to, within the time limit 48 (forty-eight) hours, pay or guarantee the execution, in the amount of R $ 11,110,016.82.
That is approximately 2.1 million $.
Good find. It's certainly nail biting time!
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/processos/240043561/processo-n-2213966-5120198260000-do-tjsp
A latest on a hearing where the earlier mentioned advocates were involved (also involves Zamin)
no they changed the date to the back end of Q2, just read all the filed on ampa that's if you have all day to do so " we all look at files differently that's if you can speak Portuguese & read the language, give it a go,
They said last sept they would be shipping in dec 19 don’t forget so they are already 7 mths late.
Why do you think they have until Friday to agree otherwise it goes back to court - where have you found that info?
isb l never said that" l said some time ago it would take 6 to 8 months from when they said they would start shipping,
So are you suggesting that if it goes back to court with referees this will drag on for another 6 months ie Dec20?
And I assume you believe they won’t agree by Friday so we are going to be waiting a long time?
if they do not agree by Friday " the process will have to return to court to mediate i.e that will mean referees , but as the fab 5 say l am a lying loon, G/l
cause use your own research take no notice of any one else but your self" just remember nice numbers don't make money "
Do you know anything on this maddog?
I am curious since it says contemplated on May 13 2019. So I just want to know what was involved with the whole PoA there.