RE: Making sense10 Aug 2021 06:52
Targa123: After a quick look at the Churchill Mining award document one, allow me to point out one big difference with this quote from the conclusion (Claim based on documents forged to implement a fraud)
“ In conclusion, the Tribunal cannot but hold that all the claims before it are inadmissible. This conclusion derives from the facts analyzed above, which demonstrate that the claims are based on documents forged to implement a fraud aimed at obtaining mining rights. The author of the forgeries and fraud is not positively identified (although indications in the record all point to Ridlatama possibly with the assistance of a Regency insider). Notwithstanding, the seriousness, sophistication and scope of the scheme are such that the fraud taints the entirety of the Claimants’ investment in the EKCP. As a result, the general principle of good faith and the prohibition of abuse of process entail that the claims before this Tribunal cannot benefit from investment protection under the Treaties and are, consequently, deemed inadmissible.”
Bad comparison