RE: Anglo Pacific Interims31 Oct 2020 11:06
@Obs - Thank you. The link works for me :)
Do you think a decision is still to be made?
For me, this ruling is definitely linked to the shipping ruling because it directly refers to it.
"This urgent measure was filed aiming to assign a suspensive effect to the special appeal filed byDEV MINERAÇÃO S / A (MINERADORA) against the judgment of the São Paulo Court of Justice, which, considering an interlocutory appeal handled there, maintained the decision of the first court that ratified the plan and granted its judicial recovery, recognizing, however, that the project for payment of labor credits did not obey the command of art. 54 of Law 11.101 / 05.
As stated in the initial petition, the special appeal is still waiting for its first admissibility judgment to be made by the São Paulo Court (e-STJ, page 4)."
"considering an interlocutory appeal handled there, maintained the decision of the first court that ratified the plan and granted its judicial recovery, recognizing, however, that the project for payment of labor credits did not obey the command of art. 54 of Law 11.101 / 05."
This particular line was what I was referring to. The judgement back in July (I think) only had one objection, which was to how inflation (I think) was accounted for and suggested a different method.
But is this line the concern?
"As stated in the initial petition, the special appeal is still waiting for its first admissibility judgment to be made by the São Paulo Court (e-STJ, page 4)."
I thought the decision was in favour of dev because of this line.
"This urgent measure was filed aiming to assign a suspensive effect to the special appeal filed byDEV MINERAÇÃO S / A (MINERADORA) against the judgment of the São Paulo Court of Justice"
Sign In
Follow the stocks
