Member Info for Looed

Avi8r - I try my best to make them aware as best I can that shareholders need to be updated on a more formal basis. As the cases and (hopefully) roadblocks fall away they really have little reason not to be in comms with us all.

Rightly or wrongly, the company seems unconcerned about Cayman. They are very dismissive of it in the Texas filings and they did state their focus was on the US and Georgia.

Orrick's have now motioned their removal from the original Harris County case as well.

Meanwhile...In the FIC case, lawyers for FIC / liquidators have asked the court to rule that SN has been duly served as they have been unable to contact him in person. As they seem to be focused on unravelling the story told to them by ZM about Green and the company, it would seem they have a bit of catching up to do.

I expect there will be similar motions on all the other cases that involved Orricks.

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5, the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP and Claudia Wilson Frost, Christina Ponig Maccio, and Chris Richart (collectively “Orrick”) respectfully request permission to withdraw from their representation of Appellee Zaza Mamulaishvili. Orrick has not heard from Mr. Mamulaishvili regarding selection of new counsel, but stands ready to cooperate with transition of the matter as soon as counsel is selected.

ARGUMENT
I. Orrick has good cause to withdraw from its representation of Mr. Mamulaishvili under Texas Disciplinary Rules 1.15(b)(5), (6), and (7). First, Orrick has been unable to communicate with Mr. Mamulaishvili in a manner consistent with good attorney-client relations. See TEX. DISC. R. PROF. CONDUCT 1.15(b)(6) (a lawyer may withdraw if the representation “has been rendered unreasonably difficult by the client”); see also Sims v. Sims, 623 S.W.3d 47, 57 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2021, pet. pending) (an inability to effectively communicate with a client can support a motion to withdraw).
Second, Mr. Mamulaishvili has not met his financial obligations under the terms of his engagement letter with Orrick. Orrick has advised Mr. Mamulaishvili that it would seek to withdraw if he did not provide Orrick with the financial resources necessary to continue his representation. See TEX. DISC. R. PROF. CONDUCT 1.15(b)(5) (a lawyer may withdraw if “the client fails to substantially fulfill an obligation to the lawyer regarding the lawyer’s services, including an obligation to pay the lawyer’s fees as agreed, and has been given reasonable warning that the lawyer will withdraw unless the obligation is fulfilled”); see also In re A.R., 236 S.W.3d 460, 474-75 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, no pet.) (a client’s failure to pay fees can support a motion to withdraw); In re Daniels, 138 S.W.3d 31, 33-35 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding) (same).

The rest of the Motion is just procedural and the link is here - https://search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia.aspx?MediaVersionID=1f94c985-e85f-4ddd-84c2-555fa1f2566e&coa=coa01&DT=Motion&MediaID=1c380c25-0757-41d3-a29b-2d7116906727

The first appeal was launched by FRR to appeal the decision not to compel arbitration over ZM's termination. The second appeal was launched by ZM in an attempt to overturn the T.I.

The two Texas appeals each have a new event listed - Motion to withdraw as an attorney.

The filing should be uploaded in the next day or two so we can who is walking away, and maybe the reason why.

I had some advice from LSE admin.

We are OK to talk about certain individuals so long as we refrain from making defamatory or libelous comments or statements that cannot be substantiated. Posters can only make a claim if it can be linked to an online source. If you can do that, it shouldn’t be a problem.

It’s OK to continue to share and discuss court filings etc, or anything on the public record.

It’s OK to say “the judge has stated in the filing that the actions are criminal and I agree with the judges’ comments.” And we can discuss the case in relation to the public record as its all traceable.

You can’t say “Based on that evidence, I have a feeling that person has committed even worse crimes and I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a massive fraud going that they don’t know about” unless you have a source to back that up.

I have seen similar actions on other BB’s, so it’s not just here.

Hi BryanW - I have written to LSE to ask if they can shed light on the removals or offer any guidance. Will let you know if they reply.

Yes WHamBoy, good to see that the company statements and the statements from Georgia are aligned.

Pt. 4 (and final part)

J2 - Lawyers of Frontera also say that criminal proceedings have been launched against Zaza Mamulaishvili. The case concerns his possible damage to the interests of the company Frontera and abuse of power. Let’s see what the outcome of the litigation will be. Until then, the question marks for the company split in two remain for us as well.

J1 - Thank you, Elene. Elene Benidze informed us about the current events around the company Frontera. We will return to this topic in the future, as we remind you that Frontera is the company that has repeatedly made Georgia the object of critical statements by US congressmen, which naturally has a very negative effect on the country's investment climate. We will also wait for the court result to find out who is lying and who is not regarding the company dispute. Meanwhile, the company's lawyers say that they are cooperating quite well with the Georgian government at this stage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txmblwF0BIg

Pt. 3

Kakha Sharabidze, Managing partner of “BLB” - Mr. Zaza Mamulaishvili has been relieved of all positions in Frontera companies. He has the right to use the Frontera name. He has no right to interfere in the actions of Frontera in any way. He has no right or competence to speak on behalf of Frontera. According to the Entrepreneurial Register, Mr. Zaza Mamulaishvili is registered as a director of certain companies in Georgia. As we are told, he uses it in his favor.

J2 - As for the ongoing processes in Dedoplistskaro, the Oil and Gas Agency says that they are carrying out environmental protection measures in agreement with the company Frontera and in coordination with them, because part of the reservoirs are overflowed and there is a risk of ecological catastrophe. The overfilling of the reservoirs is connected with the company Frontera, due to which it is not excluded that the company will be fined a rather large amount - 0.5 million GEL.

Giorgi Tatishvili, Head of State Oil & Gas Agency - There are small reservoirs directly on Mirzaani deposit and further about 7-10 km there is Dedoplistskaro collection point where there are larger reservoirs. Mirzaani reservoirs are overflowing and oil can be spilled from there every day. In general, what harm Frontera has done to the environment is a separate issue because it did not take care of the wells, but in this case there was a very real danger of oil spilling from the reservoirs, something that had to be prevented. Therefore, very simply, in the presence of the executive police, with the help of the Oil and Gas Corporation, this oil was transferred from one reservoir to another.

Vazha Khidasheli, Advisor of State Oil and Gas Agency - The Oil and Gas Corporation is by law a national oil company engaged in investor relations and acting on behalf of the state as an operating and commercial partner. We are instructed to carry out oil and gas operations in the area and to maintain and dispose the extracted oil and gas.

Pt. 2

J2 - (contd) - Yes, Nino. In recent days, conflicting information has been circulating around Frontera. On October 26, Zaza Mamulaishvili, affiliated with Frontera Eastern Georgia, who has represented Frontera in Georgia for years, shared on social media that the State Oil and Gas Agency entered at the Dedoplistskaro oil field which is owned by Frontera. According to Zaza Mamulaishvili, they were trying to seize private property. To understand more details of the story, we arrived in Dedoplistskaro. In an interview with Business Formula, Zaza Mamulaishvili said that the State Oil and Gas Agency was trying to revoke the license for their company by bypassing the law. To verify this story, we contacted the State Oil and Gas Agency, where we were told that we would learn more details from the statements made by Frontera's lawyers. It is clear from these statements that Zaza Mamulaishvili has been fired as the director of Frontera Eastern Georgia since August 2020 and he has no right to speak on behalf of the company. However, according to Zaza Mamulaishvili, he still makes statements on behalf of the director of the company to all media outlets and says that we can verify his status in the public registry, where he still remains the CEO of Frontera Eastern Georgia Ltd. However, as a managing partner of the law firm BLB and an ombudsman of Frontera, this is only a technical detail. Frontera Eastern Georgia has suspended its activities and Zaza Mamulaishvili has been deprived of his authority for more than a year.

ZM - About 35-40 people, various high-ranking officials of the Ministry of Economy, State Security Service, the police came to our oil field and the Oil and Gas Corporation and the Oil and Gas Agency tried to expropriate our private property. This is the first case during our work in Georgia of direct and illegal seizure and expropriation of private property by force. The Ministry of Economy and the Oil and Gas Agency do not even have the mechanism to stop, suspend and even declare invalid. Therefore, it is a finger-pointing, fabricated document on the basis of which they want to legalize lawlessness.

J2 - Georgia signed an agreement with Frontera in 1997. The agreement was signed with a foreign company - Frontera Resources Georgia Corporation, which in turn established a new company Frontera Eastern Georgia for operations in Georgia. This company was or is headed by Zaza Mamulaishvili. However, due to a misunderstanding and controversy between the company's management, Frontera's lawyers say today that they have suspended Frontera Eastern Georgia. At the same time, the State Oil and Gas Agency says that the company did not have the right to own oil under the agreement, and Zaza Mamulaishvili's statement that the oil stored in the reservoirs in the Mirzaani field belongs to Frontera Eastern Georgia is not true.

PT.1

J1 - We start the issue with the details of one of the most high-profile business disputes of recent times. The case concerns Frontera, which has been involved in an arbitration dispute against Georgia for years, but as it turns out, the company is also suing a Georgian-based subsidiary, accusing its director of abuse of power and the loss and misappropriation of thousands of barrels of oil in Georgia. The case of Frontera is one of the most high-profile cases in the United States of America, which has repeatedly been a source of concern for US and Georgian government officials. We remember quite harsh statements related to Frontera's arbitration dispute, but even after the dispute ended, a number of questions remained, as members of the government said that Frontera had won the case and the company had not fulfilled its investment obligations, while Frontera's representatives argued the opposite. The full version of the arbitral decision was then unavailable to stakeholders and the media as the parties refused to make it public. Although the country's arbitration disputes cost millions of GEL, in the summer of 2020 the government announced that it would no longer terminate its contract with the investor. However, it seems that during this period a controversy began within Frontera itself. Some of the company's founders have filed a dispute against the director of a company based in Georgia over the possible theft of oil. Nevertheless, to this day, the head of this company often spreads information in the media and claims that the state is expropriating the property of "Frontera", while the other side says that the authority of this company is completely suspended. Against this background, oil is being spilled from the Dedoplistskaro reservoir, which poses a great ecological threat to the country. Our journalist, Elene Benidze, was trying to find out who is lying and right in this rather high-profile case. She spoke to all parties to the dispute. Elene, we are already expecting more details from you.

J2 - Yes, Nino. In recent days, conflicting information has been circulating around Frontera. On October 26, Zaza Mamulaishvili, affiliated with Frontera Eastern Georgia, who has represented Frontera in Georgia for years, shared on social media that the State Oil and Gas Agency entered at the Dedoplistskaro oil field which is owned by Frontera.

Avi8r - just to comment on your second point. The courts have already stopped ZM. The criminal charges against ZM & Co are to unpick and apportion responsibility for historical wrongdoings. The company statement is also to clarify that recent comments made by Zm & co lack merit and are without foundation. Indeed, ZM himself admits he is prevented by the courts and authorities in Georgia from continuing his conversion / passing off. All appeals have failed. This is why his only course of action is ongoing attempts at contempt and the repeated breaking of the T.I. by trying - and failing - to pass himself off as 'our' FRR.

Concurrent to this the company moves forward with its talks with the GG etc as well as promise to make good on the wrongs perpetrated by ZM against the workers and contractors.

I do not think the criminal proceedings will unduly delay progress in other areas of discussion.

Pt. 2

In this context, on June 11, 2021, Frontera Resources obtained a Temporary Injunction in the 281st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, USA that, among other things, prohibits Mr. Mamulaishvili and his affiliated company, Green Capital, from 1) converting Frontera’s assets in Georgia, 2) competing with Frontera in any way and 3) conducting any operations associated with Frontera’s holdings in Georgia. This is an extraordinary action by any court in the United States, and Frontera met the burden of proof required to set the order. The court issued this order because it recognized the irreparable harm that would ensue if such an order were not granted and enforced. Accordingly, Mr. Mamulaishvili, Green Capital and their associates must cease and desist from any and all competition with Frontera and its interests. Also, on July 14, Frontera applied to the Prosecutor General of Georgia with the request to initiate criminal proceedings in Georgia against Mr. Mamulaishvili. The investigation is launched in connection with unlawful appropriation or embezzlement of another person’s property or property rights using the official position and in especially large quantities based on Articles 182.2 and 182.3 of Criminal Code of Georgia. Frontera intends that Mr. Mamulaishvili and his associates will bear the full criminal responsibility for all wrongdoings against Frontera in Georgia.

Frontera looks forward to continued cooperation with the Government of Georgia and, in doing so, strengthening U.S./Georgia trade relations. It is our goal to be an example of successful U.S. investment in Georgia and, by doing so, encourage more U.S. companies to consider opportunities in Georgia for their next investment location."

I have received the official version of the message WHamboy shared earlier. This message is directly from US Corporate, not the Georgian lawyer.

Pt. 1

"October 26, 2021
Houston, Texas U.S.A.

Frontera Resources Corporation, a Houston, Texas U.S.A. based international oil and gas company that has been working in the country of Georgia since 1997, today announced that its former executive and his associates continue to issue false and misleading public statements to the press associated with their attempted conversion of Frontera’s business in Georgia. These statements contain false claims and misrepresentations as to Frontera’s business in the country of Georgia and are designed to induce inappropriate support for their fraud.

Mr. Zaza Mamulaishvili was dismissed last year from his managerial/executive positions held in Frontera’s companies due to his abusive actions. His public statements, as well as those of his associates, are intended to mislead and damage Frontera and also attempt to mischaracterize the Government of Georgia as hostile to Frontera’s business interests in Georgia and hostile to foreign direct investment from the United States. Mr. Mamulaishvili’s recently released statements also contain personal political speculations. To be clear, Frontera is working closely with the Government of Georgia regarding its return to full operations and is very appreciative of the Government’s ongoing constructive support. Going forward, Frontera intends to cooperate with local stakeholders, employees and contractors to remedy any damages that were inflicted by Mr. Mamulaishvili and his affiliates.

Mr. Mamulaishvili’s statements amount to tortious interference with Frontera’s business in Georgia and Frontera has taken action in response to this improper behavior. He and his activities are in no way associated with Frontera Resources Corporation and its affiliates. They are not authorized to utilize Frontera’s name and brand. Moreover, they are in no way connected with U.S. interests, nor Frontera’s historical investments of approximately US$500 million.

Frontera’s board of directors dismissed Mr. Mamulaishvili from all corporate responsibilities with Frontera in August 2020 and thereafter terminated his employment for cause. Subsequently, Frontera initiated legal action against him in the United States and in Georgia in order to protect and preserve its longstanding business in Georgia.

Judging by the wording used I think that is an official statement from the company.

Nice find cymro1864 - I will send to the translator.

FIC (a Cayman related case but trying to be litigated in Texas) have repeatedly failed to serve SN and have now asked the court to declare him duly served as they are unable to do so.

Both SN and Mourant claim they didn't know they were supposed to attend various Zoom hearings yesterday, (which is strange as the hearing orders are there for all to see). Instead, SN and Mourant have issued a joint request for an in-person hearing "because both Plaintiff and Defendant believe an oral, in-person hearing on these Motions would be the most efficient means by which the issues could be best presented and considered by the Court."

There are multiple articles and versions of the "oil removal" situation. ZM continues to pass himself off as a US company (so in contempt of the TI. This nugget (which might have been embedded in other articles) sounds encouraging -

"According to Netgazeti, representatives of the Frontera Corporation, which stands on the other side of the dispute with Mamulaishvili, confirm that the Georgian authorities are acting in agreement with them."
https://www.smi.today/ru_smi/1793223-glava-amerikanskojj-kompanii.html