The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Rockhopper was always a 30-50 bagger from here or we lose our shirts. The ICSID is actually a little insurance in my opinion. If the FID never happens but we get the award RKH value surely can’t drop and if anything the company is worth at least 3x todays sp. Even if they wind it up.
GLA, obviously I prefer the multi bagger option :)
I actually enjoy Garbleds messages. The blue bottles and Sharon and dancing girls etc, was always entertaining. So each to their own and it was Phipps who said DES would be £20p so garbled was just passing on the message. In relative terms given the dilution and time I still believe that if allowed to run it’s course, it’s definitely a multi bagger running into the 20x to 50x levels
GLA
This share is not for widows or orphans. I don’t think anyone needs protection. I prefer letting people have their sat and deciding myself who I believe. The meeting on the Falklands sounds very likely and there wasn’t anything earth shattering about it, just more weight behind being invested in this get rich slowly venture. 35 years invested so far lol.
GLA
This guy has been involved in Sea Lion since 2011, would love to know what he thinks.
https://www.bgs.ac.uk/people/dodd-thomas/
2011 – 2017: Analysis of the Sea Lion discovery and appraisal (North Falkland Basin): Petroleum Geoscientist. Technical reservoir studies on the Sea Lion turbidite fan system and in-place hydrocarbons.
2014 – 2016: Falkland Plateau Basin: Petroleum Geoscientist. Regional mapping, hydrocarbon prospectivity and pre/post-drill analysis
2017 – Ongoing: Falkland Islands Geoscience Consultancy: Project Manager; Petroleum and Sedimentary Geologist. Regional hydrocarbon prospectivity assessments; pre-drill geological report assessments; appraisal drilling analysis; field-scale reservoir analysis.
GLA
I posted this previously and SecretBlueprints post basically but more articulately expressed the same thing. Therefore I see very little chance of the annulment request being upheld.
“Based on annulment history and the way the Italian government wanted to apply EU rulings over international laws I think they will appeal for annulment under item
b) manifest excess of powers by the Tribunal
This has been the most successful category for annulment appeals, but is still extremely small possibility with only 4 cases ever being fully annulled.
This approach was also rejected by the Tribunal a few years ago, as to admit they are basically undermined by the EU would make the ISCID completely impotent.
So I can’t see them upholding that.”
Totally agree this is the power crazy EU versus international law. The EU has been on a power grab for decades and still wants the United States of Europe. Brexit was a major dent to that although some EU supporters are still trying to open that door again via underhand means.
So yes this isn’t Italy versus Rockhopper, this is EU trying to claim power. The Irony will be if Italy also leaves EU and leaves Brussels floundering with their take over of Europe starting to look in tatters.
Based on annulment history and the way the Italian government wanted to apply EU rulings over international laws I think they will appeal for annulment under item
b) manifest excess of powers by the Tribunal
This has been the most successful category for annulment appeals, but is still extremely small possibility with only 4 cases ever being fully annulled.
This approach was also rejected by the Tribunal a few years ago, as to admit they are basically undermined by the EU would make the ISCID completely impotent.
So I can’t see them upholding that.
Ok I found a great article on annulment history and stats
My summary is this
Grounds for annulment:
(a) the improper constitution of the Tribunal; zero annulments
(b) manifest excess of powers by the Tribunal; (4 full annulments, 6 partially)
(c) corruption on the part of a Tribunal member; zero annulments
(d) a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure; (1 full annulment, 2 partially)
(e) failure to state reasons. (2 full annulment, 8 in part)
These numbers are tiny compared to the 355 awards
50% of all cases are contested to be annulled only 5% of cases are annulled or partially annulled, probably more are just tweaked a little, but I don’t have that data. So there was a one in two chance Italy appealed and of course they did. Outcome is still looking favourable like 1/20 chance we don’t get the full award plus interest. The sp hasn’t built in any real award anyway, so nothing to lose now
The drafters of the ICSID Convention regarded the annulment process as an exceptional remedy. As a result, ICSID awards can be challenged exclusively within the ICSID Convention framework, on the five defined grounds. These are contained in Article 52(1) of the Convention are the following:
The Tribunal was not properly constituted;
The Tribunal manifestly exceeded its powers;
There was corruption on the part of a member of the Tribunal;
There was a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure;
The award failed to state the reasons on which it was based.
This study shows that although applications for annulment are increasingly common, the number of successful annulment applications remains low. Of the estimated 355 ICSID awards rendered under the ICSID Convention as of 31 January 2021, nearly a half were subject to annulment proceedings but only 19 (around 5%) have been annulled in full or in part. Notwithstanding this low success rate, the importance of the ICSID annulment mechanism to the whole investment arbitration system is difficult to overestimate.
Therefore the chances of Italy having even a partial success is extremely low
From what I have read unless the arbitration committee was corrupt the Italian government has zero grounds for the annulment and it should be dismissed out of hand. 18-24 months is a complete joke! I’m completely gob smacked with that time line. This should be 2-4 weeks max.