Member Info for GarethUK

AC said that the Tunisians put up less than 5% of the evidence in the first case (with Zen offering the other 95%) and were reprimanded for making such a dire defence. Sounds like they didn’t do any better even with new lawyers, in the second case. Not surprising really as it’s hard to justify daylight robbery!

The Tunisians MUST now want to settle for all 3 cases to avoid the huge sums involved in losing case 3 as well.

I suspect this RNS is purely intended to flag the fact that there is plenty of time for the Tunisians to propose a settlement that’s acceptable to Zen in advance of the judgement on claim 2. Shows that our side isn’t panicking and demonstrates a quiet confidence imo

Spot on raharh,

That’s completely my understanding too. As I’ve posted before, the only thing I would add is that if their lawyers are any good, they will want to settle for all 3 cases and avoid the huge cost of the full extent of liability for the 3rd case.

It would be great to have a settlement so payment terms are agreed and payment is made relatively promptly. Well worth giving them a small discount for this.

SC,

I agree completely. However, if and when the Tunisians lose Case 2 then their lawyers may well want to settle on the basis that they can wrap in Case 3 as well and settle for all 3.

That’s how we might end up with $350m including payment terms. That would be a very good outcome.

Another idiot filtered, but he will be thrown off imminently.

Exactly, slicevolley. If you look at all the facts and circumstances objectively, I just can’t see another outcome. I’m assuming in that the new legal team for the Tunisians will want to minimise their clients’ liability, not draw it out to maximise their own fees.

Hope this will be helpful:

ICC1 claim was for $6.7m, we were awarded $9.7m

AC repeatedly said in Oslo that ICC2 is a ‘photocopy’ , ‘carbon copy’ (his words) of ICC1.

We are claiming $130m in ICC2, but remember the uplifted value of the award in ICC1.

According to the publicly announced timetable, and reconfirmed by AC in Oslo, the latest there will be a decision on ICC2 will be the summer of this year.

In practice, if the hearing next week goes badly for the Tunisians, I can see a settlement coming sooner than the summer. They will want to avoid going all the way to the outcome of the 3rd case which is by far the biggest claim at over $400m.

My betting is still that we will be offered $350m with payment terms included, and that will form the basis of an RNS in the next few months.

Every post’s a scream, callit! Keep ‘em coming!

SC, Slicevolley, Callit, Panman, Umaz, Targa, CLT95, Threeputt,

Any more on whether we do this?

Rider75,

Que?

And by the time the full result including interest compounded monthly, and costs, are detailed, I believe ICC2 could result in close to $200m to us.

Callit

Love that analogy, and totally agree. Any decent legal advice will argue strongly for a settlement, otherwise they are in for well over $600m liability, make no mistake

Thanks Umaz,

What I didn’t say because it is perhaps obvious, is that if there is an agreed settlement, payment terms will be negotiated as part of it and AC ‘won’t need to send the boys round’ to collect our winnings.

I think investors should be encouraged by the appointment of new and/or better/more experienced lawyers by the Tunisians IMHO.

The facts of the case don't change, and its impossible for them to disguise daylight robbery, which is what happened. AC has always been very clear and consistent about the reality of what happened, and the result of the first case confirmed the facts.

The benefit of new or better or more experienced lawyers is clear for Zen because their only way of improving the outcome for Tunis/their clients, is by mitigating their liability. That is, not letting the claims run the full course and trying to reduce their liability by negotiating a settlement. They may well be saying 'why let the remaining 2 cases run full course and pay well over $600m when we can negotiate a settlement and get out for, say, $350m'.

IMHO this should encourage holding the shares, or perhaps even adding to existing holdings - although I am spent out now, and am very fully invested!

In response to several questions in Oslo, AC stressed that he was fully committed to rewarding shareholders. He talked about a special dividend or similar, once he had taken advice on how best to reward shareholders, particularly those in Scandinavia where a special dividend may not be the most tax efficient method.

Panman - that’s hilarious!

Certainly true of Zenith. Sometimes feels like we have been wandering around looking for a fight! lol

Spot on Florida, this is my understanding from Oslo as well .

At today’s exchange rate, $350m = £282m

Slicevolley,

That’s very interesting, and thanks for setting it up.

In the hours that it took me to get back from Oslo to the Westcountry last Tuesday, I spent a lot of time thinking about how all that I had heard, might ultimately end.

My conclusion? That it would end with a total to us of $350m.

Take your bets,

Just use filter and move on. No one needs to be distracted by an idiot.