Member Info for Uncanny

I don't pay for the LSE premium service, but is there any interesting posts there?

Email: Dear Mrs Kinnear I am not here to discuss an award, but ICSID procedural failures. In the recent case of ROI-v-Churhill Mining and ICSID verdict using a lead witness statement which was thrown out by the tribunal is of great concern! The lead witness was asked to take stand and did not attend and also vital mining records were not provided which were vital to the case, but the panel pulled a blind eye. There are also other fundamental flaws in how the case was conducted by the tribunal panel which must be investigated. Do ICSID adhere to quality controls and is there an independent panel that can review your arbiters in what could only be described as a serious failure in procedures as an impartial arbitration system? Kind regards Reply: Thank you xxxx. To answer your question, the only review available for an ICSID Tribunal award is an application for annulment under Article 52 of the ICSID Convention, based on the five grounds in that provision, Kind regards, Meg

Thanks

Would anyone have Meg Kinnears email address please

The simple answer is because of poltical weight. CHL are 1% and ROI 99%, thats the upshot, with much weight via the World Bank etc. The small man rarely wins when there is more at stake such as a States reputation. Yes, we can argue on many fronts but the big problem is that this is being represented to the same arbitrars and are they gooing to the ruin their reputataion and say "yes we were wrong!" The annulment / revisions could be won, but our chances of winning, overturning the decision and getting fair to low compensation are less than about 5% IMHO. Trying to be optimistic and hopefully, but thats the upshot I think. The state always wins because of their connectiions and a shitty little aim company is left in the gutter. The way of the world, but would love to be corrected with a six figure sum at stake and my own lack properly doing the risk/reward DD. I think sucked on a definate outcome! An Irish friend of mine said that life is normally black and white, but when it comes to legal representation there can be grey areas, blue, green and all the colours of the rainbow!

Actually we don't know, but that is what we are hoping for.

Itsmyshares Is this the timescale you think on a decision or other? Please clarify I know OXUS have till April to get a decision with the accrued interest and a decision early/ mid 2018 CHL we will know eom on their stance which I hope will be sufficient grounds to annul / revise, providing they get funding, setaside costs and a strong case to do so.

Orbiter I think they mean they will inform shareholders (advise them) of their course of action - revise / annul?

Well one thing is for sure, if CHL knew it was game over, then I'd guess we might heard by today! Finers crossed.

Actually reading again they are still working on grounds for annul / revise with CC to make a decision. 'Advice' probably wrong word to use.

2015 OXS 2016 CHL Very painful! See what Feb brings but I don't like the word 'advice' used as it instills no confidence.

Annul / revise or liquidate? Another month to wait, but happy at least that CHL and CC are still talking. Guess it takes time and many hours of meetings to go through the tribunals findings with a fine tooth comb!

Tomorrows the day hopefully on our future here!

Yes all will be revealed soon. If we annul / revise then one can interpret that CC have a good case, as why throw good money after bad!

The big hitters with millions of shares won't let this die without a fight IMHO.

Lets make a verdict once we have news eom.

Lets see what CHL announce before we judge in the next 8 working days. Fingers crossed.

Maestro Spot on! The tribunal were jusdge AND jury

I concur! CC's success / failure dicatates individuals bonuses and as a magic circle firm, big litigation cases are fiercely competitive for law firms with future case referrals dependent on past success.