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.
Under the same heading is these two.
Thought it might be Outrider Management but red herring I think , googling them only returns some religious missionary OMF international
OMF ISSUER
OMF WORLDWIDE
Extract of some of the F’s in just published Caymans Gazette
TAKE NOTICE THAT the Registrar of Companies, having reasonable cause to believe that the undermentioned companies incorporated under the Acts of the Cayman Islands are no longer carrying on business or are not in compliance with Sections 168 and 169, intends to strike the said companies from the Register as of the 31st October 2023, in accordance with the provisions of Section 156 of the Companies
FOXTROT INTERNATIONAL LDC FRBT DIRECTORS LTD
FRBT TRUSTEES LTD.
FRONTBIO, LTD.
FRONTERA RESOURCES CORPORATION
FRONTERA RESOURCES OVERSEAS CORPORATION
FRONTIER HEALTHCARE LTD.
FUENGOLF LTD.
FUK TAI (CAYMAN) INVESTMENT LIMITED
Hopefully
This time next year Rodders........
Tabs, surely not come this far with god knows how much spent on legals to completely fail now??understand completely your take it all with a pinch of salt comment, I am prepared as most have for the worst, but not and never have give up hope we see a return plus interest on our investment from our company ?
GLA real holders
Ill be taking what the company says with a pinch of salt. Theyve done so much ducking and diving for five years It beggars belief. Well its finally caught up with them. Shareholders no absolutely nothing about deals reached to this point, and, should we have had them put to us to vote on. Sorry, I forgot its steves company.
Well im guessing the 100m investment that was going to appear has completely disappeared as who would invest that kind of money in the region at the moment
Looed, many thanks for your detailed thoughts, I can’t believe I understood most of it, by time this is all over I think us holders could enter the “bar” test.
PS, I like your comment on more news in coming day, I remain hopeful that all things are truly bright and beautiful
GLA real holders
Lifeishard – best to keep an open mind. Any action outside of a deal with YA – and it seems to me they intend to fight – is going to take time be it an appeal, a new case, a focus on the recent FRC v YA etc.
We don’t know how advantageous / punishing deals made to date have been. However, I believe this is the first time the company has lost a case in Texas post delist. So, if this issue isn’t over as they claim, then we need to see how they handle (and have hopefully well prepared) for this event.
SN needs to fulfill the terms of the Mourant deal by Feb 2024. There is the prickly issue of FIC v SN and all the other litigation big and small. I cannot fathom the amount already spent on court cases and there will be more to come.
Yet still they talk of cleaning up the past and planning for a post-litigation life and restarting operations.
Hopefully we will learn more in the coming days.
Montiburns - I don't recall seeing any PG's in this matter.
Looed, yet again many thanks.
Monti and Avi8r have summed up perfectly on pretty much how we all feel. 🤞 SN has a plan?
GLA real holders
Given the statement “return to operations” coupled with $3.5m+ plus costs, and reputational damage it would be best to settle this judgement and move on. The war in Ukraine and developing tensions in Israel suggest a 3rd inflation wave, so there is an opportunity here to expedite that “return to operations”, reverse any reputational damage and recover the $3.5m+ plus costs. Otherwise its just going to drag on indefinitely and any returns lost.
If the figures quoted on recoverable oil were genuine, then this whole sorry saga can be put behind rapidly. Lets hope the return to operations comment is sincere and we see some action soon.
Thanks Looed.
We have to be grateful for small mercies so I will take that short message from the Company with relief and with open arms. Also, we are hugely grateful to the ‘messengers’ who continue to be the bridge between us and the company in this self imposed vacuum of information. This channel/conduit of information flow is crucial to keeping same of us sane and hopeful, so do not underestimate the stress carried by many for so many years.
On the case itself, one wonders what reason(s) FRR has to appeal this judgement as two courts (in the UK & US) who have sided with YA.
I assume no PGs were given against this facility (any one confirm?).
From Looeds message ,
In line with the above, the company continues to prepare for its - in their words - “return to operations”.
Maybe there is still hope of a return here , GLA .
That's a bit of spin form the Company. The judgement by its own words is final. "This is a Final Judgment disposing of all claims between the Parties and is appealable."
The appeals court may decide the lower court was in error, which is always a possibility, but certainly they are in a worse position now that the court has recognized the UK judgement. And unless Frontera get some kind of injunction pending appeal, YA are free to try to enforce the judgement in Texas.
MontiBurns - The amount awarded was $3.4m plus interest and costs. The agreement was between YA II and FRC.
I have received a message from the company.
1- The judgement rendered last Friday (in YA v FRC) is not final, the matter is ongoing.
2- The company remains focused on clearing outstanding litigation.
3- In line with the above, the company continues to prepare for its - in their words - “return to operations”.
It always kind of cheesed me off that FRR didn't pay YA. They had a payment plan but I believe missed the biggest and final payment. My impression that this was Zaza messing about. There was wells dug, oil pumping and probably the ability to get the money from somewhere. In the great scheme of things it's wasn't all that much. It would have better to get shot of YA and push forward with the operation in my opinion. Perhaps there was more at play or the Directors thought there was but who knows.
I notice the verdict is appealable. I don't know if FRR will or just simply settle up somehow.
My guess is that all the value of the site will tend to push those with the most to lose to sort out the situation as there could be way too much for them to lose. The movements over the next few days or so could be telling.
Thanks Njames. Can we re-confirm what the final amount owed to YA was? I do recall from pre-2018, YA debt totaled c.$2.2M which was rescheduled to be paid over 18 months. But I can’t recall how many installment were paid. On top of that, and as per Company Law, interest on debt is ‘frozen’ from the date a company appoints Receivers but again I can’t recall which FRR Entity was the obligor to the YA Facility.
Anyway, as I said in my previous post, FRR has never disputed this debt to YA, so prudence would have dictatesd that the company would have planned for the worse case scenario. The big question now is whether YA will hard ball or prepared to agree to a new repayment like Mourant.
Furthermore, did we get any more info on the new case lodged by FRR last week, on the on-site count of "fraudulent and misleading liens"?
Is the can still in one piece, very tough metal and rigid if so.
Excerpt from the Order Granting Plaintiff YA's Motion for Summary Judgment. There will be no trial on the merits, unless Frontera appeal and the decision is overturned. I expect Frontera will appeal to further kick the can and then play cat and mouse on service and with technicalities as YA attempt to enforce the UK Court judgment, which is now recognized in Texas.
ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Traditional and No-Evidence Summary Judgment is GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED that the money judgment entered against Defendant by The Business and. Property Courts of England and Wales on June 29, 2021 ("June 29, 2021 Judgment") is recognized under the Texas Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act. See TEX. CN. PRAC. & REM. CODE§§ 36A.001, et seq. Accordingly, the June 29, 2021 Judgment is
(i) conclusive between the Parties to the same extent as the judgment of a sister state entitled to full faith and credit in Texas would be conclusive; and
(e) enforceable in the same manner and to the same extent as a judgment rendered in Texas.
....
This is a Final Judgment disposing of all claims between the Parties and is appealable.
Have they all left the building.....
Its either that of to delay shareholders revolt. But i just would not put SN in that frame after his fathers legacy.
Very good point erazel👍?
Would they really fight so many legal battles to fail with YA and not have a continuance plan in place?
Another way to see it is that, to date, SJ and Trial on Merits ha e been treated separately with different motions and hearing dates. We need to see if the ruling in the SJ hearing impacts the hearing on Merits.