RE: Pet26 Jan 2020 18:17
kdickson24 Jan '20 - 15:20 - 12960 of 12961
Moneyintransit attended the court case this afternoon and also managed to catch up afterwards with Mr Fayad. Here is a summary of his notes.
COURT CASE NOTES
---------------------------------
- Current ruling is continued, which means a further extension.
- Chase Nominees is a completely innocent bystander in this case.
- Mr Fayad and Mr Mehraik both attended (Mr Tamraz excused himself for medical reasons).
- Petrel's solicitor stated (and judge agreed) that all defendants had consented with last week's ruling.
- Mr Fayad had prepared a lengthy statement, read out by Petrel's solicitor, which the judge accepted to hear, and agreed with Mr Fayad that he would make this statement a sworn affidavit today.
- There was never any intention to sell, and in fact Mr Fayad is a victim of a dishonest action by the lender which is understand to be EYPC.
POST MEETING
-------------------------
In the hall, after the court session, Mr Fayad and Mr Mehraik were waiting on the various solicitors grouped together to discuss further.
So I took my chances and approached him, telling him that I was an interested Petrel shareholder and that we had met at the EGM.
Mr Fayad was very friendly, and we had a quick chat.
I told him that all of this was rather unfortunate, but the overall and most important question for us shareholders is if the Asset transfer will still go ahead.
He told me that this was certainly still the intention, and that is why he was there, to help sort out the issues.
I said that as a shareholder I was concerned that the 2nd Tranche of 64 million shares had not been paid yet.
He said that they had offered to pay these shares, but that Jim [Finn] had told them that first this current issue has to be sorted!
He emphasized that he was the victim of of a dishonest action - "as I also mentioned in my affidavit".
He thought that the group of solicitors (a few yards away, discussing) were trying to see if it was possible to arrange a meeting this afternoon with Jim/John (and Fayad/Mehriak) to see if they can find a solution. He said "maybe a special issuing of shares, maybe a cancellation of the 37m shares involved"
When I thanked him for his time, he emphasized again that they were willing to pay the 2nd tranche, that they really want "to help Petrel" (his words), and he then actually asked me to share this with other shareholders I know.