Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. 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.
degsie, thanks for posting. ATB
Cheers @degsie. And @Kiran! I'd hoped it was as simple as that, with the courts continuing to rule in our favour. :-)
still on target... ;)
Reply from KM.
The second article is referring to an item raised last week in relation to an investigation to the previous owners - as mentioned then this has nothing to do with us and we were aware of this as it has been ongoing since 2015 -2016.
The latter is Anglo trying to not pay the labour liability that the labour court has already ruled on.
Again we are aware of the issues and neither should have any impact on our first shipment timeline.
Yes, minus 10% for other creditors
it’s obviously in everyone’s interest... except anglo... for anglo to honour their obligations to pay for zamin’s labour debt... rather than those costs being carried forward into the jrp... is our contribution to the small labour creditors capped by the jrp agreement at $2.5m...
Are they looking for R$100mil? If you pee off the courts they won't forget!!
Zamin's disregard for the operation is total. The mining company also failed to pay labor charges and amounts to service providers, in addition to selling ore without environmental licenses and without authorization from the courts.
In 2015, the state government suspended the railway concession to Zamin, alleging the multinational's failure to comply with several terms of the agreement, such as the lack of conservation of wagons and tracks and the lack of assistance to passengers and farmers in the municipalities cut by the railway. A legal battle broke out and initially Zamin successfully appealed.
In April 2016, however, the Amapá Court of Justice maintained the government decree that revoked the concession. In 2017, Zamin, indebted at R $ 1.5 billion at the time, filed for bankruptcy.
That was when the MPF filed a lawsuit seeking the condemnation of the mining company for material damage and deaths caused by the collapse of the port. The lawsuit, which is still ongoing, charges R $ 100 million for environmental recovery of the affected area , indemnification from families and damages to the community.
https://observatoriodamineracao.com.br/de-eike-batista-a-bilionario-indiano-investigacao-transnacional-de-corrupcao-mira-a-zamin-ferrous-e-deputados-no-amapa/
they don’t want to let go of anglo... do they... and anglo don’t want to give up on appealing every courts decision to implicate them in the unsuccessful succession of the amapa iron ore project... it must be a significant amount they’re arguing over...
Or should that read DEV pay more..
@5thto3rd
I'm reading the words but not seeing it... WHAT am I missing??
Is it saying we have to cough up more than the 2.5mil
Visas etc.
When analyzing the id petition. 166a0ba, as well as the id decision. f9f28f7, issued by the Court of the 2nd Court of Bankruptcies and Judicial Recoveries of São Paulo, SP, the Egrégio Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (TJSP), this Court notes that:
a) of the amount of US$ 10,000,000.00 (ten million U.S. dollars) to be obtained by Zamin Amapá Mineração S.A. through the already authorized sale of iron ore, only US$ 2,250,000.00 (two million, two hundred and fifty thousand U.S. dollars) will be allocated to the payment of labor creditors;
b) the original request of the company in judicial recovery was for US$ 2,500,000.00 (two million and five hundred thousand U.S. dollars) to be allocated for this purpose, but the Judgment of the aforementioned Court of Bankruptcies and Judicial Recoveries determined that 10% (ten percent) be kept in judicial filing, with the scope of maintaining the guarantee of other creditors; c) the amount to be effectively used by Zamin Amapá Mineração S.A. for payment of labor creditors is clearly insufficient, since, even with the current quotation of the U.S. dollar, its debts to this 7th Court of Labor of Macapá exceeds R$ 21,000,000.00 (twenty-one million reais); d) in addition to such an amount, mentioned company must large amounts next to each of the other seven Labor Courts that make up the Forum of Macapá, AP.
Therefore, the requests made by Anglo Ferrous Brazil Participações S.A. in the id petition are refused. f9f28f7, keeping in its entirety the decisions already given in these records, which determine the joint and several liability of the petitioner for the labor debts of Zamin Amapá Mineração S.A. As seen, it has no economic power to meet its obligations and, for that reason, the petitioner must honor them.
Science to the parties.
MACAPA/AP, May 22, 2020.
TATYANNE RODRIGUES DE ARAUJO ALVES
Have you read this ?? Why negative ??
???? Not sure why you think that ????
Isn't it just the court will hold on to 10% to pay the small creditors... To make sure they are not robbed of whats due?
doesn’t look good... does it...
What did you make of this @tomcat?
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/298399851/trt-8-judiciario-22-05-2020-pg-590