Member Info for SpaceHoppa

and this is pretty damning of the bent EU judges as well. It seems perhaps, unlikely that international law will give too much weigh to a unilateral ruling by self serving EU judges.

Another notable feature is that the Court reached this conclusion purely from the vantage point of EU law, without any consideration of international law.

The Court’s interpretation of “this Treaty” in Article 26(6) of the ECT as being a reference to EU law just because the EU is a signatory to the ECT is baffling and one may wonder whether every international agreement to which the EU is a signatory is now to be regarded as an instrument of EU law.

The distinction with commercial arbitration is equally baffling, as the suggestion is that Member States did not enter into the ECT of their free will.

The first part of this paragraph says a lot ! Bent EU judges basically said it does not have jurisdiction, however being the EU power grabbers they made up any old carp to suggest they do.

Jurisdiction
The Court first examined whether it had jurisdiction over the reference. It considered that even though, ''in principle, it did not have jurisdiction'' to interpret an international agreement in the context of a dispute not covered by EU law, it did have jurisdiction in this instance because:

the ECT is an agreement concluded by the EU Council, and thus, an act of one of its institutions, which the Court is entitled under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the TFEU) to interpret;

it is in the EU’s interest to interpret the provisions of the ECT uniformly to “forestall future differences of interpretation”;
and
by choosing Paris as the seat of the arbitration, the parties made French law, of which EU law forms part, the applicable lex fori to the dispute in the main proceedings.

Great information again Mother.
This is yet again the political arm of the EU trying to grab more power and influence via it's politically influence so call Court of Justice.

The ECJ is not a trustworthy court as it nearly always rules in favour of the EU, however obviously has a lot of ability to interfere in areas it really has no business to.

On the very good assumption that Rock will win the case and be award £10m, £20m, £40millions etc,
then international law will ensure Italy pays,
either the easy way, or the hard way as Cairn recently demonstrated on India.

I find setting a fill or kill at the Ask, normally moves the SP up, or it gets filled.

Yes, good to see Pure getting its act together during ramp up.
Back in Q4 they produced just 4,011oz in 3 months. In just July they produced 3730 oz,
& hope to produce over 27,000 oz in H2 !

Capital costs are high as they improve the mine, so AISC are high, meaning little to no profit, however things are definitely moving in the right direction.

Guidance for H2 2021
Gold production for H2 2021, inclusive of July, is expected to be in the range of 27 – 32 koz Au with grades and throughputs increasing steadily toward the end of the year. Cash Costs1 for the fourth quarter, the first full quarter of commercial production, are expected to be in the range of US$1,025 - $1,125 per ounce. AISC1 for the fourth quarter is expected to be in the range of US$1,600 - $1,750 per ounce. Looking forward into 2022, production is expected to increase and Cash Costs and AISC are expected to fall significantly driven by higher grades and throughput coupled with decreased investment in capital development and other sustaining capital programs. This dynamic of increasing production and falling costs is expected to continue throughout 2022 and beyond as grades generally improve as mining progresses deeper and toward the 8 Zone as outlined in the 2019 Feasibility Study.3

An out of court settlement should have been anticipated and discussed before any ruling if Rocks lawyers are any good, which they are.
If Italy are stalling now then we should tell them to go f0ok themselves!!

ENERGY bills are set to rise by £150 a year due to soaring wholesale costs.
Regulator Ofgem will announce the increase in the price cap for gas and electricity bills next Friday August 6.

The tangible effects of Governments swallowing the demonising the O&G industry will be felt by the poorest the most.

I like this bit. 'Potential to drill 8 Zone in 2021'.
That could & should be some very interesting for Q1 assays.

Boris has much more sense than Italy and this is why we should be very confident of at least getting back (minus fees) MOG's expenditure in Italy and hopefully significantly more.

Asked whether he (Boris) would stop exploitation of the field, off the coast of Shetland, Mr Johnson said:
“This was a contract that was signed in ... 2001 and we can’t just tear up contracts. There’s a process to be gone through.”

$30m net to Rock will be a tidy sum, fingers crossed for much more!

Wishful thinking Perhaps,
But the fact ICSID have not given a new timeframe might mean we are close to hearing of their decision??

Good to here the plant is now more or less at design capacity.
Pure look cheap.

Following a successful commissioning period, the PureGold mine, milling facilities, and other critical systems are now all operating in line with or rapidly approaching design capacity of 800 tonnes of ore per day on a sustainable basis.

Darin Labrenz, President & CEO of PureGold, commented, "Commercial production is a significant milestone and marks the beginning of a very exciting growth phase for the Company. By combining stable gold production with the high-grade exploration potential that makes the PureGold Mine so unique, we are making significant progress toward our goal of unlocking the full potential of the PureGold Mine and becoming Canada's next iconic gold producer."

I haven't given up on the greedy piglets getting Rock to FID and first oil.
However, that's irrelevant for now as the immediate question is what is the risk reward for Rock's SP.
I suspect most agree the OM case is won & Italy will have to pay for their actions.
That's leaves the question of how much?? At a minimum Rock should get back their investment minus legal costs, perhaps £10-15m. This alone might add 10pence to Rocks SP.
If the pay out is net £30 to 40millions, then our SP could triple or more as dilution and going concern fears are removed, & the prospect of getting to FID in good financial health greatly enhanced.

Obviously in the unlikely event of no award, it could easily knock off 50%. But reward looks far more likely so Rock is a very good calculated buy at the moment.

It does seem every1 is resigned to and already bleating about, a multi million$$$ pay out. Good!

Because in May it was RNS reported that ICSID
'anticipates that it should be in a position to render its award in the course of July'

On the 2nd of July ICSID kindly informed, and did not have too, that they
'should be in a position to complete its work' in July.

If they are true to form, I hope they either say on the 2nd August that the award has been rendered,
or they update when they think the award will be rendered.

Guys, I am happy to read posts from both of you, as you both add to this forum.
I am also a supporter of Glenrothes efforts & he is aware of my 500k holding, & I always use my vote.
I do not want rid of the greedy piglets at the moment.
I do want their unjustified massive wages curtailed or minimum delayed until first oil.

Tomorrow we probably will not get a decision from ICSID, but we should get a steer on how long the delay will be.

May update stated
"The Tribunal anticipates that it should be in a position to render its award* in the course of July. The Tribunal will revert to the Parties towards the end of June to confirm this timeframe."
July update stated
"The Tribunal has made significant progress and confirms that it should be in a position to complete its work in the course of July."

''should be'' used in both cases. If not announced tomorrow, then I expect there will be another ''should be'' Rns on Monday

On the face of it SecretBlue, it does fit the Rock case very neatly,
however I do not know all of their other cases so their is a slight question mark.

Interesting link & thank you for posting SecretBluePrint. There is no direct reference to Italy and Rock,
however if it is that case, then this is interesting regarding the due diligence aspect

''Without warning and in breach of the Energy Charter Treaty, the host government introduced
restrictions preventing foreign companies from oil exploration. No compensation was
offered to the company for removing its production concession, and THE STATE PERMITTED
domestic companies to continue their operations.''

Does this not arguably blow out of the water any potential lack of DD??
I feel as I have said, you can not do DD against an unexpected change of policy from Governments.

The OM case is practically a certain home win, I do not think lack of DD comes into the equation either,
plus Harbour are experienced and expert, and have ploughed a lot of money into this case for a substantial pay out.
The risk v reward case for Rock right now appears heavily skewed to the reward side.

This was

Errr, the greedy piglets just passed on what they were told by ICSID. Not their fault on this rare occasion.