We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
Sorry Sheddy that seemed to appear ignorant but typical typo, apologies
Shoddy.... I expect the judge will be privy to detail and reasoning that we are not, hence maybe a touch of mediation to gain common ground but only assumption on my part
Might it suggest it's going to be complicated? Has the Judge offered a compromise and waiting to hear back from both sides. Not sure if its the Judges remit to actually arbitrate rather than just pass judgement - any corporate law experts out there?
Still waiting to hear 17.40pm - what is happening??
No RNS yet, but share price spiking upwards implies someone knows the result..?
heavens are we moving up???
thanks Rusty
Dark knight, it won't be an AGM. It will be an EGM, An extraordinary General Meeting, date hasn't been announced yet, As proposal from prosperity only just in. Normally within 1 month. I would suggest the old bod will be doing a lot of canvassing along with investor relations.
Hi Lawrence13 UGC didn't propose a motion they just voted against the bod at the AGM. Old board then elected new board, as an interim measure. Everest who also voted against the board, then went to court to get new board ousted.
Prosperity a Russian shareholder then called EGM to try and reinstate old board. Hope that helps.
Would it have been released as a RNS ?
Just received an email from HGL. Basically I have to contact them re any voting? However I can't recall the UCG motion. Am I going nuts?
Hello Rusty. Well I must have missed the resolution that UCG tabled as I can't recall any discussion around it
Rusty when is the next agm ?
The petition by Everest was about the new bod. I don't think anything else will be discussed as its not relevant to the petition. That will be discussed at the EGM.
As per the voting at the AGM, it certainly was not illegal, it showed UGC taking advantage of inertia, and low voting to get a majority decision.
I believe the board and investor relations, have already contacted some of the institutional investors who didn't vote to make sure they vote at the EGM. Although I don't agree with everything the BOD, and Pavel, does, I still think these are the people to take us forward.
I was reacting to copper3 who suggested that. But how did the agm motion to replace the existing bod get by us all.
Lawrence13 this hearing has nothing to do with the old bod. It is related to your dad and the rest that have been temporarily put in charge, Whatever happens hear should not affect EGM.
actually, illegal as certain people/companies weren’t restricted by the technical "hitch"
So if hypothetically the judges decision today is to reinstate the old BoD -is that it?. Or will the egm still hold. As for me I don't recall any mention of the resolutions that were voted on and announced at the AGM. The whole thing seemed to be sneaked in as if open knowledge I'm sure alarm bells would have started started ringing. The morning of the AGM we all seemed to be stunned . I also believe the BoD were stunned and purposely stopped the AGM phone conferencing to buy time to come up with a strategy . The technical hitch excuse was just too convenient.
This is just my laymans guess- new interim board is illegal, but outvoting of old board was not subject to proper notice of intent to oppose relection , therefore old board is reinstated.
Dark_Knight2020
"Does anyone think that the board rules were breached by the mafia ? "
To be honest not in my opinion. I'm not a lawyer though.
Jonny, looks like a grifter if I have ever seen one.....LOL
what is really annoying is that gold is sky high and we are sitting at 25.50p when we should be 40p plus. Does anyone think that the board rules were breached by the mafia ? any hot shot lawyer on here who has a gut instinct about this type of board room struggle ?
If this is ruled in favour of UCG, the old team still have 3 to 1 voting advantage on the BOD unless you believe the 3 are UCG plants.
sorry all bad grammar day... still half asleep..
I think in this case the judge wants to be fair to both parties and wants both parties to present their final closing statements. It depends of the judge feels that if the rules were manipulated by the Russian mafia or bent by the mafia in order for them to take control by skulduggery or Machiavellian type strategy and if the judge feels there was any conspiracy then I think the judge will rule in POGs favour and against the mafia... thoughts ?
Yes he might of told them to play nicely or bring the company down