Member Info for Bebeto

LW- The main judgment, which determined the financial liability and claims between A. Jiwa Shamji Limited and Kilimapesa Gold, occurred on 5th February 2024.

Caracal Gold was obligated to release a RNS in February 2024, triggered by the judgement.

They can put it in a RNS when they win an arbitration and receive funds but they don't put anything in a RNS when they lose a court case and have to pay out.

I can't see the FCA allowing this behaviour to carry on.

From the latest update;

"combined with the fact that no cash flow is being generated at Kilimapesa,"

How on earth could they put that statement out and not mention the court has seized part of the plant, to repay a debt?

Then have the audacity to write;

"we look forward to getting the company back on track to be a 20,000oz per annum producer with 3moz in resource."

I've seen enough of this non-compliance because the above should have been notified to shareholders, there's absolutely no trust now and therefore, if I get a chance to exit I'm taking it 100%.

Makes me wonder that PKF would have known all of this , yet shareholders were not updated, so what will the FCA make of it all?

And will there be another opportunity for me to exit because if there is I'm taking it 100%

Interesting and good work from DanielC42R

"The items were not sold as the bid offers were low. They are planning a repeat soon. Info received after emailing them. Dan"

So the debt has NOT been repaid.

Interesting also is the name of the poster who posted the tweet on X.

Kilimapesa gold Pty a subsidiary of Caracal Gold plc, and therefore the rules below apply;

LR 9.2.2: This rule requires a company to make timely and accurate disclosures regarding price-sensitive information. The rule states:

"An issuer must ensure that any inside information which, if made public, would be likely to have a significant effect on the price of its listed securities is disclosed to the public as soon as possible."

The court ruling against Kilimapesa Gold, particularly the potential financial liability, could be considered inside information that must be disclosed under this rule.

Market Abuse Regulation (MAR)

Under MAR, which applies to all companies with securities admitted to trading on regulated markets (such as the LSE Main Market), there is an obligation to disclose inside information. The regulations aim to ensure that all investors have equal access to material information. Key provisions include:

Article 17: Issuers must disclose inside information to the public as soon as possible.

Article 18: Issuers must ensure that the disclosed information is accurate and complete.

Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules (DTRs)

DTR 2.2.1: This requires companies to disclose inside information to the public as soon as possible, similar to LR 9.2.2. The rules ensure that all investors have access to information that might affect the company’s share price.

I've done some digging around and came up with this summary;

Plaintiff: A Jiwa Shamji Limited

Defendant: Kilimapesa Gold PTY Limited

Court: High Court at Kilgoris

Judge: F. Gikonyo, J

Date of Judgment: February 5, 2024

Case Overview:

A Jiwa Shamji Limited provided equipment (a wheel loader, Insta screen, and excavator) to Kilimapesa Gold PTY Limited on hire and sold the Insta screen to them.

Kilimapesa failed to pay for the services and equipment, leading to a debt of Kshs 21,414,520.32 (around $166,000 USD).

The plaintiff charged a 3% monthly interest on overdue invoices.

Defendant's Response:

Kilimapesa admitted part of the debt but claimed they had suffered losses from equipment breakdowns, which they estimated at Kshs 42,636,442.23.

They argued this amount should be deducted from what they owed.

Court's Decision:

The court ruled in favor of A Jiwa Shamji Limited.

Kilimapesa was ordered to pay the debt.

The court allowed the plaintiff to seize and sell Kilimapesa's assets if they did not pay, although the sale had to wait for 14 days.

In summary, A Jiwa Shamji Limited won the case, and Kilimapesa Gold was held liable for the debt.

Well it's all about shareholder transparency and when this does come back on the market, I wonder who will be the laughing stock.

I said the other day that the company hadn't explained why the production had stopped, apart from the artisan miners issue.

I don't think they wanted to tell us about the news today.

JC get over yourself, why do you want to clog this BB up debating anything I've said and somehow in your own mind put things your way.its actually making you look childish and desperate.

My interpretation is my interpretation and it's irrelevant whether you like it or not.

Zan , you haven't posted here for months so I must have forgotten about you in all the excitement.

JC doesn't like the word decommissioned and feels threatened by something being taken out of service for the last 3 months, someone official must have turned up at the mine and put a stop notice on everything selected for sale by auction.

Whatever way you look at it, will make zero difference to the outcome here.

JC - whether the auction went ahead is irrelevant because in order to be listed in an auction the components would have to be decommissioned and prepared for removal for the sale.

6 months inability for a gold mine can also be defined as decommissioned without any official notice, currently 3 months so halfway there.

I called RM out a long time ago and none of you were having it.

There's a direct correlation between the end of the high-grade material and the wheels falling off the production.

I suspected the plant was decommissioned and so it turns out part was to settle a debt.

The main thing that's going to put the company into administration, will be it not being able to pay it's debts.

On this occasion, this debt looks to be settled but are there any others?

Conversely it is still a retrievable position, even though their reputation is shot to bits.

I'm left wondering, was PKF really to blame for the length of suspension?

I doubt we'll get another opportunity to exit before there is a resolution, one way or another.

The processing plant has been idle for three months, certain things could seize, the machinery has to be shut down properly, components earmarked for replacement should be made ready.

Decommissioned meaning taken out of service, pending upgrade.

If they are going to upgrade the plant, they'll need to spend money on decommissioning some of the plant first.

I doubt they'd spend money on recommissioning something they've decommissioned in the above scenario.

Iwonttell - I nearly replied with an informative logical answer but frankly you've been such such a jerk lately you can do one.. LOL :)))

They have complicated gold bearing ore with variable grades, and the gold recovery processes needs improving.

Mainly low-grade which requires a higher throughput of material and better recovery through to the end product.

The underground higher-grade is variable due to the structure of the sheer zones. They did build a laboratory on-site, to speed up the time it takes to identify a drop in grades / veered off course, as the longer timescale was contributing to a dramatic loss of gold ounces mined.

JC- the company is in a hole, but it's not currently in a check-mate situation.

I don't see that large, looming, definitive debt repayment the company has no-way of making, sending it under.

Potentially it's still a recoverable situation.

RM does have a knack for getting $1million to $3million in funding, and according to the latest update, they are looking for funding.

So who knows, if they have funds and a new auditor, anything is possible.

Not saying this is going to happen here but it happens to companies in financial distress.

When a company is unable to pay its debts (a situation known as insolvency), creditors can take action to recover what they are owed.

They apply to the court, and they seek to put the company into administration.

If the company is in suspension, shareholders do not have an opportunity to exit.

If the company is not in suspension, shareholders do have an opportunity to exit.

No one can say with any certainty when the suspension will be lifted because that would be the FCA decision and dependant on Caracal Gold to adhere to the FCA requirements.

This situation is not just a simple publishing of the financial statements and lifting of suspension because there's now two layers of complexity to add to the process.

The applicable Listing Rules ;

LR 1.3.1A: This rule provides the framework under which the LSE can suspend a company’s securities from trading if it fails to comply with its listing obligations, including the timely publication of financial information.

LR 9.2.1R: A company must adhere to the continuing obligations for disclosure of financial information. Non-compliance with these rules can lead to suspension.

LR 5.1.1R: The FCA has the authority to suspend the listing of a company’s securities if it believes that the smooth operation of the market is at risk. This can include circumstances of financial distress where the company’s solvency or viability is in question.

I've been in similar situations with several companies and that experience is coming in handy here.