Member Info for SpaceHoppa

Rock have funds for another year.

Timing is unknown, however I would say 95% chance ICSID will find in our favour.
I would say 50% chance of sums being significant, as in $50 to $100million or more.
So chances of an equity raise are about 50%. It is by no means "certain" at all !

Thanks for sharing Paul.

Brilliant find Pauldrayton.

"EU law would not prevail over ECT"
It seems a case ruling has already been made and unlikely the out of remit statement biased partisan EU judges will be given the time of day.
I expect Italy may be annoying ICSID and a positive for Rock ruling declared this month.
Paul, it might be worth email Moody directly to pass on, just in case the lawyers are not as diligent as yourself!

It will be anything in a huge range depending on OM and Navitas.
Saying any old figure without talking about the above is just being a prat!

All water under the bridge now. What matters is what we do going forward.
I don't blame the directors for everything that's gone wrong.
PMO, oil crash, green zealots, weak short sighted Prime Ministers etc have all played a part.
I do blame 100% the directors for cash troughing as company cash was running low!

For now it is all about the OM award and Navitas, hopefully in that order.
Moody has a decade of knowledge of Sea Lion and that can not be dismissed as useless,
so regrettably it's probably best for now he stays. I do support Glenrothes aims,
however I am conscious that management are probably the most busy they have been for many a year.
It would be good if ICSID made an announcement late this month as dismissing Italy's bu1l**** should not take long!

Personally I don't care if Rock gave Navitas 75% of SL and the rest,
as long as they paid us $25m to keep the lights on,
and agreed to carry us until first oil and allowed us to pay off our costs/debt from future revenue.

Eventually every reasonable man and his bulldog knows the OM case is won otherwise why are Italy clutching again at jurisdiction straws.

ICSID seem keen to get this latest delaying tactic sorted asap as they indicated the case was completed in July.

Rock need to put in place a plan to get Italy to pay asap, seize assets or look into selling the debt on for perhaps 75p per £ awarded. Lucrative for our current lawyers on top of their fees.

Should say dire, not 'sure.

Not unexpectedly there are some distraction posting after recent events.
But the facts are still the same as 18 months ago,
Rock investment was then, and still is a punt on a decent OM award.
I have added 300,000 the last 18months and still see a better chance of a decent pay out and relatively soon I hope, from ICSID. If that doesn't happen then I agree Rocks SP will be sure.

In a nutshell it's all about OM atm, everything else is just a distraction, and they have cash for just another year. I can wait another month or two to see how ISCID decides.

Superritch, it is more straightforward than you feel it is.
other than timing it is a simple case of 'does ICSID hold jurisdiction and will they find in our favour?'
Both are very much likely to be ok for us all things being equal.
So it comes down to when! When will we get an award and when will Italy pay?
That is now more the issue for Rock than the ICSID process.

SecretBlue, what happened to Cairn is no indication of what will happen with us.
Perhaps if Cairn were more aggressive in perusing seizures from day one they would not have waited so long.
Also bad debts can be sold to third parties, as happened against Argentina.

It is only 'all over without an equity raise',
if OM is either not found in our favour, insufficient, or getting the cash is prolonged.

The very realistic chances are , ICSID will hold firm on jurisdiction and ROCK will win a few 10's of £millions.
Getting cash from Italy may take time but if for example Rock win $50million,
it may be possible for our no win/no fee lawyers to 'buy' Italy's debt from us for perhaps $40m,
and they peruse Italy themselves plus costs.

What do we know?? Well we know
that ICSID have previously ruled against Italy for jurisdiction,
that the political EU lawyers at the biased ECJ did not make a formal ruling regarding ECT,
that ECJ gave a statement, an opinion only, on a subject outside of their remit,
that ECJ opinion seemed (no surprise) pro EU biased, one sided and ignored international law,
that it was not a formal ruling anyway so has no legal merit in law,
that ICSID have acted that for them was at lightening speed.
that ICSID only asking for a very limited 5 page response from each side.

Taking all the above into account, I feel there seems no reasons to believe ICSID have any legal grounds to side with Italy because of a biased, off remit statement from the politically motivated EU judges.

I also hope and feel that ICSID are finally seeking to draw this case to a conclusion, and that we may here about their jurisdiction ruling, and the ''award'', sooner than we fear given the lengthy delays so far.

Fudd,
Rock were the junior partner, the monkey.
PMO were operator and called the shots.

Important to remember EU statement had "no formal ruling". It was a statement of ECJs intent should they be asked. As Muchabout says, it has no legal merit !

If Rock do end up owning all the licences for SL etc,
Surely that is a valuable asset that they could flog off a % For, even if on the cheap, to keep the lights on should OM take a turn for the worst.
10% to Cairn for $25m?
Keeps Rock in the game and a steal for Cairn.

As The whiteDuke said earlier, and this is very important,
Italy MUST have lost the case otherwise why try and bring in a partisan off the remit statement from biased Pro EU so called judges. Italy have lost the case!
Question is will ICSID disregard a statement that was not even a ruling,
I see no grounds at all how they can take into account a dubious statement that has no legal backbone.

Rock should be ok for another year at least
even if Italy does manage to string out the ICSID award for another year,
and if Navitas do not step in with some cash for acreage.

'the Directors have assessed that the cash balance held provides the Group with adequate headroom over forecasted expenditure for the following 12 months - as a result, the Directors have adopted the going concern basis of accounting in preparing these consolidated financial statements.'

Formal exit by Harbour - Rockhopper expects to regain operatorship and 100% working interest in Sea Lion and key North Falkland Basin licences, subject to necessary consents

Biased political EU judges!!

The Tribunal confirmed in May 2021 that it anticipated being in a position to render its award in the course of July 2021. In late September 2021, Italy made a request, and the Tribunal agreed, to admit a recent European Court of Justice judgment related to inter-EU Energy Charter Treaty disputes.

The Tribunal has requested Rockhopper's legal advisers to respond to the European Court of Justice judgment by 6 October 2021.