Member Info for bigdouble

We all like to think they are buys, especially when your holding over half a million shares. But I can assure you it’s a rollover. The stock would have moved up if they were both buys.

If you hold stock A say, they allow you to roll stock B. As long as there is sufficient stock being held in your account overall it doesn’t matter which stock is rolled. Usually you can only roll stock over once, brokers often get round this rule. I used to do this all the time and sometimes really paid off. The person rolling the stock pays the commission

The £2k is the brokers commission.

It’s still very positive when large investors roll stock, as they still believe news is due soon.

More likely it’s a rollover

Think my RNS buttons not working properly. :(

Cadence Minerals (AIM/AQX: KDNC; OTC: KDNCY) is pleased to confirm that it has posted the notice of the 2021 AGM and forms of proxy to registered shareholders. The AGM will be held at 11 am 4th August 2021 at the offices of Hill Dickinson LLP, The Broadgate Tower, 8th Floor, 20 Primrose Street, London, EC2A 2EW.



Please note that due to the current Covid-19 situation, arrangements for this year's AGM are different from those of previous years. In keeping with health and safety advice, the meeting will be held with a Board quorate only. Consequently, we kindly request that shareholders do not attend the meeting in person. Please do not travel to the meeting, as you will be refused entry.



To ensure that shareholders can still participate in an orderly and safe AGM during the Covid-19 pandemic, this year's meeting will be held via an electronic platform. The platform will permit shareholders to hear the meeting's chairman and to submit questions on the resolutions and business of the meeting. AGM specific questions can be submitted via the platform during a 48-hour period from 11:00 am 2nd August 2021 and real-time during the AGM. Questions submitted via any other method than the platform will not be answered.



Whilst this year's AGM structure utilises certain special pandemic-related discretionary powers, it remains wholly in accordance with KDNC's articles of association and the Companies Act. It also fully complies with the Company's Covid-19 policy and governmental Covid-19 safety advice.



Shareholders are therefore strongly encouraged to exercise their AGM voting rights by submitting the proxy form attached with the AGM notice. The deadline for submission of proxies to the Registrar is 11 a.m. on 2 August 2021 or 48 hours before any adjourned meeting. You are strongly advised to appoint the chairman of the meeting as your proxy to ensure your vote is counted.



The Circular and notice of AGM is available at: https://www.cadenceminerals.com/investors/aim-rule-26/.

Very little stock about to buy. Any sign of deal completing and major re rate on the cards.

Seemed to be very confident, won’t be long IMO

When a trade goes through for the same number of shares back to back with a very slight price difference, this is nearly always a rollover of stock. T trades are when stock is purchased on a say 20 day (T20) credit facility with the broker. At the end of the 20 days the client has the option to rollover the trade. The broker will then sell the stock and immediately buy it back. The small difference in price is what the broker earns.

Nice £45k buy on ask

With so few shares in circulation, this will explode when news hits. There will be zero chance of buying any decent amount below 60p - 70p IMO. Going to be fun when it finally happens.

Cheers MLQ here’s hoping for a great week ahead. 10 years of holding, think I deserve some profit at last.

Is the Golden Ruby bulk carrier anything to do with us. Coming into port now I think

CharlieBrown10- at least you are admitting you are not a genuine poster. That clarifies that.

ISA - I bet after every lottery draw you then write the numbers down and tell people you’re won. Sad

Monocratic decision
SPECIAL RESOURCE No. 1762931 - AP (2018/0221438-5)
RAPPORTEUR: MINISTER MOURA RIBEIRO
APPELLANT: ANGLO FERROUS BRAZIL PARTICIPACOES S.A.
LAWYERS: LUIZ EDUARDO LESSA SILVA AND OTHER(S) - RJ032868 RODRIGO PONCE BUENO - RJ104782 ALEXANDRE EMILIO MARTINS AMARAL - AP001532A TATHYANA FROES DIOGO - RJ208650
APPEAL: AC SOARES SANTOS
LAWYER: NILDO JOSUÉ PONTES LEITE AND OTHER(S) - AP000118
INTEREST : DEV MINERACAO S.A. - UNDER JUDICIAL REORGANIZATION IN
JUDICIAL RECOVERY
OTHER NAME: ZAMIN AMAPA MINERACAO S.A.
MENU
CIVIL. CIVIL PROCEDURE SPECIAL RESOURCE. RESOURCE
MANAGED UNDER THE AEGIDE OF THE NCPC. MONITORING ACTION.
INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. OMISSIONS. OFFENSE TO ART. 1,022
OF NCPC CONFIGURED. OMISSIONS. SPECIAL RESOURCE
PROVIDED.
DECISION

From the reading of the draft of the interlocutory appeal that gave rise to the present
appeal, it can be inferred that AC SOARES SANTOS - ME (AC SOARES) filed a lawsuit
monitoring against MMX AMAPÁ MINERAÇÃO LTDA. currently called ZAMIN
AMAPÁ MINERAÇÃO S.A. (ZAMIN AMAPÁ), intending to receive
amounts related to the service provision contract signed between the parties.
The action was upheld.
Initiated the execution of sentence, the d. Court of first instance effective
the judicial constriction by the online attachment of the current account balance, through the
Bacenjud system, from the company ANGLO FERROUS BRAZIL PARTICIPAÇÕES S.A.
(ANGLO FERROUS), in view of having been appointed as a partner company of
executed ZAMIN AMAPÁ.
In an interlocutory decision, the 1st degree court determined the immediate
return of the constrained amounts, considering that in the 44th contractual amendment of this,
the company ZAMIN AMAPÁ succeeded him; determined that ZAMIN AMAPÁ proves the date of publication of the decision of the Court of the 2nd Bankruptcy and Judicial Reorganization Court; as well as that all constraints fall on the assets of the company ZAMIN AMAPÁ and its subsidiaries.
Against this interlocutory decision, AC SOARES filed an interlocutory appeal that was provided by the State Court pursuant to the judgment as amended:

CIVIL PROCEDURE INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. ANALYSIS ACCORDING TO 1973 CPC. DECISION AMENDING THE CONTENTS OF MERIT OF THE JUDGMENT. IMPOSSIBILITY. ABSENCE OF LEGAL PROVISION. SOCIAL CHANGE. FULL TRANSFER OF CORPORATE SHARES. MAINTENANCE OF LIABILITY FOR LIABILITIES. PROVISION OF THE APPEAL. 1) In accordance with Administrative Statement No. 2 of the Superior Court of Justice, in appeals filed against decisions published up to March 17, 2016, the admissibility requirements must be demanded as provided for in CPC/1973; 2) A decision that, in compliance with a sentence, alters the content of the latter, outside of the cases provided for by law, violates the principles of the inalterability of the sentence and legal certainty, and is therefore subject to appeal. STJ precedents; 3) The social change of the appellee does not have the power to release it from previous debts, especially when the debt vindicated originated prior to that change, with the former remaining responsible for the liability; 4) Known and granted appeal (e-STJ, fl. 268).
The motions for clarification opposed by ANGLO FERROUS were rejected (e-STJ, pages 277/283).

Unresigned, ANGLO FERROUS filed a special appeal based on art. 105, III, a, of the CF, alleging the violation of arts. 485, VI, §§ 3 and 7, 505 and 1,022, II of the NCPC; and 50 and 1032 of CC/02, by sustaining (1) lack of reasoning and denial of jurisdictional provision, as the State Court failed to consider the arguments supporting its thesis that it does not hold responsibility for the debt contracted by ZAMIN AMAPÁ, which would rule out the obligation to pay debt contracted by a legal entity of an economic group to which it was not a part; (2) inexistence of evidential evidence of the subjective element of the patrimonial confusion or of the misuse of purpose to give rise to the liability of the partners resulting from the disregard of the legal personality; and (3) need to release the amounts unduly pledged (e-STJ, pages 314/383).
The counterarguments were presented (e-STJ, pages 387/399).
The noble appeal admitted (e-STJ, pages 285/289)
It's the report.
DECIDE.
The special feature deserves to thrive.
In terms of plan, it is worth noting that the provisions of the NCPC, with regard to the admissibility requirements of resources, are applicable to the specific case under the terms of Administrative Statement No. 3, approved by the STJ Plenary at the session of 3/9/2016:

Appeals filed based on CPC/2015 (relating to decisions published as of March 18, 2016) will be subject to the appeal admissibility requirements in the form of the new CPC.
(1) Denial of jurisdictional provision
The TJAP, when analyzing the motion for clarification, incurred in omissions related to the arguments supporting its thesis that it does not hold responsibility for the debt contracted by ZAMIN AMAPÁ, which would rule out the obligation to pay the debt contracted by a legal entity of an economic group of which it does not was part of.
It is a sine qua non for the knowledge of the special that the question of law mentioned in the appeal reasons has been analyzed by the appealed judgment.
Thus, the TJAP refusing to comment on federal issues ended up denying jurisdictional provision to the Appellant.
By the way:

SPECIAL RESOURCE. APPEAL JUDGMENT WHICH DID NOT REFERENCE TO A RELEVANT POINT FOR THE UNFOLDING OF THE CONTROVERSY. OFFENSE TO ART. 535 CONFIGURED. TIMELINESS OF THE SPECIAL RESOURCE. REGULARITY. 1. Even though the judgment under appeal dismissed the preliminary arguments raised by the appellant one by one, it silenced the fundamental point of the unwinding of the dispute on the merits, that is, the debtor's default, despite being urged to do so in the context of motion for clarification, which characterizes a violation of art. 535, II, of the CPC. 2. Interlocutory appeal not provided.

Class, judged on 6/21/2012, DJe 6/28/2012)
Therefore, the return of the records to the ordinary court is a measure of rigor to remedy the aforementioned defect.
The analysis of other issues is impaired.
In view of the foregoing, I APPROVE the special appeal, determining the
return of the case file to the TJAP to analyze the issues raised in the motion for clarification, as it sees fit.
As appropriate, I warn the parties that the filing of an appeal against this decision, if declared manifestly inadmissible, delaying or unfounded, may result in the condemnation of the penalties established in arts. 1.021, §4 or 1,026, § 2, both from the NCPC.
Publish yourself. Intimate yourselves.
Brasilia, June 14, 2021.
Minister MOURA RIBEIRO
Reporter