NoCart before the horse dudes.............
Lots more important things to focus on atm, like %%% ML , CDL exploration permit, ICC arbitration, Dathomir court case, SEZ, BFS update, FID , construction.................ffs.
But even before that, upcoming Perth Roadshow , AGM and getting out of fucking suspension.
But even before that..........compiling questions for the sophisticated investors within this forum to ask BOD at Perth Roadshow, as i didnt get a invite ( small fry in comparison ) and cant attend in any case to due work committments.
Just sayin.
no.What REALLY fucks me off is that if Tittle Tattle Tom is to be believed, he got tipped off about the DATHOMIR Tribunal outcome, asked some questions, and once again, AVZ have been forced to come clean with the information.
I don’t care if AVZ think it’s immaterial and of no effect, just let us know on a timely basis. They are starting to look a bit silly, being called out by Mr Cut and Paste for a second time.
@Der Geist, were you aware of the Tribunal outcome? @R2D2, were you?
Obviously AVZ, sees value in these proceedings.Mr I
1) I started that private conversation with you, hope you got it
2) I can’t see how AVZ ASX release (attached) states what you state in your post?
View attachment 19506
And your reply on twitter was spot on as to why this announcement came today when you replied to boatman and co. I was slow to connect the dots.Correct and my left nut is saved
Thing 1. Z/ICC Arbitration: The next action is for the ICC to determine whether it has *jurisdiction* to hear the case. AVZ think the ICC does not have jurisdiction and, if correct, the case will not proceed to the next step (of “being heard on its merits”).
![]()
My reading of the latest update:
ICC update
AVZ have made a jurisdictional challenge for the arbitration matter, related to whether the pre-emption rights were breached. A jurisdictional challenge is when a Respondent makes a submission challenging the adjudicator's jurisdiction to determine a dispute. ICC ruled in favour of AVZI to hear and determine the challenge.
The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce18 (“ICC) is among those institutions that have empowered their respective boards or courts of arbitration to decide an objection to their jurisdiction, and thus to dismiss a case if they conclude that the institute has no jurisdiction over the dispute.
So a decision has not been made here yet. ICC could either dismiss the case if they do not believe they have jurisdiction or continue on with arbitration proceedings.
DRC tribunal decision
There has been a request by Dathomir for suspension of payments which have already been made.
Both Dathomir share purchase agreements (SPAs) are subject to arbitration agreements. My interpretation of this is that you can't just get any random run of the mill tribunal to hear arbitration matters in relation to these agreements as they have set requirements written into the agreements. Only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI's acquisition. No such proceedings have commenced and the tribunal decision does not purport to have any effect on the SPAs. The tribunal decision mentioned did not happen within a properly constituted arbitral tribunal. Therefore it does not have jurisdiction. This is set out in the SPA.
AVZ considers 20 September decision immaterial. I would agree. They can suspend and hold the funds in whatever holding account they want, it does not change the fact that the transaction has occurred.
I could sell a car and receive the funds in one of my accounts by transfer. I could then give the car to the buyer then tell the bank not to transfer the funds to my main savings account...ok, so what? That doesn't mean I can get the car back.
I love it when you drinkNo
no.
I gave up asking self censoring journalists.
It’s annoying that dumb cock Tommy gets to creak the door.
Simon Cong doesn’t talk anymore, at least not to me. Don’t know why.
I was after proof of the offer AVZL lawyers made to Cong’s lawyers, but I couldn’t quite manage. The lawyer was against it, as it was reasoned needed for the appeal hearing. Cong’s lawyer was of the view that the offer was evidence AVZ understood it did not own the 15%. Perhaps in Congo Jungle fever land that is the case. But it’s likely not an argument to make, as offers are made alll the time to settle. In the end the lawyer breached a likely NDA. AVZ knows about it. Just a another slip of paper among the reams AVZ has on the little mafia.
Klaus reckons the Chinese are making offers to Cong. I think he was confident that things are going his way or for his ‘friends’. I do think we are seeing what he said was there, the level of corruption runs deep. FT is not fully respected it seems. But US would be watching very closely. we have concrete proof they are strutting their stuff because they know they only have shit lithium deposits. Great when opex/costs are low. But recoveries?
I’ll say this about AVZ’s Congo opponents, when AVZ gets the license, I think the legal disputes will continue but in due course, all the evidence over 5 years has accrued such that I wouldn’t be surprised if the right Intel agencies have it on file.
The other thing that makes me shudder about Tommy snag is that he doesn’t seem to twig it’s a bad idea for the Chinese fo get Manono. There is no strategic compass in Tommy’s nouse. (pun intended). Instead the AFR should be ringing the alarm bells on this Chinese conquest. This is not about AVZ in the end this is about Western hegemony being outsmarted in the new energy industry. We shall see.
Thanks MB. I received the PM and have responded.Mr I
1) I started that private conversation with you, hope you got it
2) I can’t see how AVZ ASX release (attached) states what you state in your post?
View attachment 19506
All positive news! The person writing the announcements should be sacked..F***My reading of the latest update:
ICC update
AVZ have made a jurisdictional challenge for the arbitration matter, related to whether the pre-emption rights were breached. A jurisdictional challenge is when a Respondent makes a submission challenging the adjudicator's jurisdiction to determine a dispute. ICC ruled in favour of AVZI to hear and determine the challenge.
The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce18 (“ICC) is among those institutions that have empowered their respective boards or courts of arbitration to decide an objection to their jurisdiction, and thus to dismiss a case if they conclude that the institute has no jurisdiction over the dispute.
So a decision has not been made here yet. ICC could either dismiss the case if they do not believe they have jurisdiction or continue on with arbitration proceedings.
DRC tribunal decision
There has been a request by Dathomir for suspension of payments which have already been made.
Both Dathomir share purchase agreements (SPAs) are subject to arbitration agreements. My interpretation of this is that you can't just get any random run of the mill tribunal to hear arbitration matters in relation to these agreements as they have set requirements written into the agreements. Only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI's acquisition. No such proceedings have commenced and the tribunal decision does not purport to have any effect on the SPAs. The tribunal decision mentioned did not happen within a properly constituted arbitral tribunal. Therefore it does not have jurisdiction. This is set out in the SPA.
AVZ considers 20 September decision immaterial. I would agree. They can suspend and hold the funds in whatever holding account they want, it does not change the fact that the transaction has occurred.
I could sell a car and receive the funds in one of my accounts by transfer. I could then give the car to the buyer then tell the bank not to transfer the funds to my main savings account...ok, so what? That doesn't mean I can get the car back.
What annoys me about AVZ’s style is circumlocution: “Only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal”My reading of the latest update:
ICC update
AVZ have made a jurisdictional challenge for the arbitration matter, related to whether the pre-emption rights were breached. A jurisdictional challenge is when a Respondent makes a submission challenging the adjudicator's jurisdiction to determine a dispute. ICC ruled in favour of AVZI to hear and determine the challenge.
The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce18 (“ICC) is among those institutions that have empowered their respective boards or courts of arbitration to decide an objection to their jurisdiction, and thus to dismiss a case if they conclude that the institute has no jurisdiction over the dispute.
So a decision has not been made here yet. ICC could either dismiss the case if they do not believe they have jurisdiction or continue on with arbitration proceedings.
DRC tribunal decision
There has been a request by Dathomir for suspension of payments which have already been made.
Both Dathomir share purchase agreements (SPAs) are subject to arbitration agreements. My interpretation of this is that you can't just get any random run of the mill tribunal to hear arbitration matters in relation to these agreements as they have set requirements written into the agreements. Only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI's acquisition. No such proceedings have commenced and the tribunal decision does not purport to have any effect on the SPAs. The tribunal decision mentioned did not happen within a properly constituted arbitral tribunal. Therefore it does not have jurisdiction. This is set out in the SPA.
AVZ considers 20 September decision immaterial. I would agree. They can suspend and hold the funds in whatever holding account they want, it does not change the fact that the transaction has occurred.
I could sell a car and receive the funds in one of my accounts by transfer. I could then give the car to the buyer then tell the bank not to transfer the funds to my main savings account...ok, so what? That doesn't mean I can get the car back.
Mr I
1) I started that private conversation with you, hope you got it
2) I can’t see how AVZ ASX release (attached) states what you state in your post?
View attachment 19506
I’ve read, re-read, and read again that word-salad abomination of an announcement.
It’s almost like someone threw some duck entrails at google translate and this is what popped out the end. FMD.
Caution: What follows is a madman’s reverse-engineered interpretation of said word salad. Read at your own risk.
Now that’s out of the way, I think I can see AVZ painting a positive picture here:
Thing 1. Z/ICC Arbitration: The next action is for the ICC to determine whether it has *jurisdiction* to hear the case. AVZ think the ICC does not have jurisdiction and, if correct, the case will not proceed to the next step (of “being heard on its merits”).
Thing 2. DRC Tribunal: AVZ are seemingly so confident on this one they did not even send the office coffee boy to stand in the corner of the hearing room and play pocket billiards for a few hours. What the shit, Batman? Either that or they were binge-watching Doomsday Preppers and forgot to put the alarm on - dunno which.
Anyhoo, AVZ are saying “we don’t give a fuck - it’s not a properly constituted arbitral tribunal”, presumably because the dispute mechanisms are laid out in detail in other legal documents (JV agreement or somesuch thing). In other words, “until such time as one of these numbnuts from Dathomir invokes a proper dispute with us, it’s ours thanks all the same”.
So yeah, I think it’s positive. If correct, it might explain the vibe about being close to the ML, but who the fuck knows…
Oh, and to AVZ management: Hi. I hereby volunteer to write your announcements from this point forward. I’ll write some nice words that are both syntactically correct and logically structured. Then I’ll hand it over Wino and Moneybags who will add the kind of verbs and adjectives that would make a soldier blush. These announcements, so authored, will then be both understandable and entertaining. You know it makes sense.
Jin Cheng ICC Arbitration Proceedings
Article 24 , Case Management Conference and Procedural Timetable - as per your link @MoneyBags1348
*the arbitral tribunal shall hold a case management conference to consult the parties on procedural measures that may be adopted - as per the ann 9/9/22 - The Parties will be convened to a case management conference in September 2022, so this obviously has happened.
Article 24 point 2 - During such conference, or as soon as possible thereafter, the arbitral tribunal shall establish the procedural timetable that it intends to follow for the efficient conduct of the arbitration
Article 24 - point 4 - Case management conferences may be conducted through a meeting in person, by video conference, telephone or similar means of communication. In the absence of an agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the means by which the conference will be conducted. The arbitral tribunal may request the parties to submit case management proposals in advance of a case management conference and may request the attendance at any case management conference of the parties in person or through an internal representative. - So here it suggests , they try and nut it out to see how best to und get things underway and undertake that efficient route in coming to a conclusion
AVZ ann 20.10.22 - The Arbitrator has issued Procedural Order No.1-3 ruling in favour of AVZI and consequently will now proceed to hear and determine AVZI’s jurisdictional challenge (around whether AVZI’s pre-emption rights were breached) before dealing, if necessary, with the merits of the case.
So would appear that most efficient manner , i.e quickest way to the end would obviously be tapping those pre-emption terms and seeing of they were breached .... based on the outcome of that, then they would decide if the case is even a goer.....ICC likely see pre-emption rights conditions as the jugular .
DRC Tribunal Decision -
As the DRC Tribunal correctly acknowledged, both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements. It follows that only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition of a further 15% interest in Dathcom from Dathomir.
So no defendants in the room , but Tribunal decision was granted to Cong for interim suspension of payments which were already in the designated account , an account number which was provided to AVZ for the deposit, Cong hasnt spent he money , its kept in an account because he decided after he had received he wanted more.....it would be interesting to see a statement of that account and any transactional movements to and returning back into. Anyway Tribunal decided to give Cong that status, but also acknowledged that both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements ....... so , only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition....
......kinda sounds like the Dathomir case holds no merit unless Cong takes it to a higher level.
...Given Cominiere's dodgy dealings, sounds like ICC probablt agree that Pre-emption rights in probably the path of least resistance in getting this thing efficiently dealt with everyone just moving on![]()
What annoys me about AVZ’s style is circumlocution: “Only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal”
What is “a properly constituted arbitral tribunal”?
Spell it out.
We need to understand why AVZ emphasises “tribunal”, whereas Tom Richardson used “court”.
AVZ says nothing on the or any authority of the tribunal.
Richardson is up to his semantic tricks. He did the same thing in his May article
Jin Cheng ICC Arbitration Proceedings
Article 24 , Case Management Conference and Procedural Timetable - as per your link @MoneyBags1348
*the arbitral tribunal shall hold a case management conference to consult the parties on procedural measures that may be adopted - as per the ann 9/9/22 - The Parties will be convened to a case management conference in September 2022, so this obviously has happened.
Article 24 point 2 - During such conference, or as soon as possible thereafter, the arbitral tribunal shall establish the procedural timetable that it intends to follow for the efficient conduct of the arbitration
Article 24 - point 4 - Case management conferences may be conducted through a meeting in person, by video conference, telephone or similar means of communication. In the absence of an agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the means by which the conference will be conducted. The arbitral tribunal may request the parties to submit case management proposals in advance of a case management conference and may request the attendance at any case management conference of the parties in person or through an internal representative. - So here it suggests , they try and nut it out to see how best to und get things underway and undertake that efficient route in coming to a conclusion
AVZ ann 20.10.22 - The Arbitrator has issued Procedural Order No.1-3 ruling in favour of AVZI and consequently will now proceed to hear and determine AVZI’s jurisdictional challenge (around whether AVZI’s pre-emption rights were breached) before dealing, if necessary, with the merits of the case.
So would appear that most efficient manner , i.e quickest way to the end would obviously be tapping those pre-emption terms and seeing of they were breached .... based on the outcome of that, then they would decide if the case is even a goer.....ICC likely see pre-emption rights conditions as the jugular .
DRC Tribunal Decision -
As the DRC Tribunal correctly acknowledged, both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements. It follows that only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition of a further 15% interest in Dathcom from Dathomir.
So no defendants in the room , but Tribunal decision was granted to Cong for interim suspension of payments which were already in the designated account , an account number which was provided to AVZ for the deposit, Cong hasnt spent he money , its kept in an account because he decided after he had received he wanted more.....it would be interesting to see a statement of that account and any transactional movements to and returning back into. Anyway Tribunal decided to give Cong that status, but also acknowledged that both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements ....... so , only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition....
......kinda sounds like the Dathomir case holds no merit unless Cong takes it to a higher level.
...Given Cominiere's dodgy dealings, sounds like ICC probablt agree that Pre-emption rights in probably the path of least resistance in getting this thing efficiently dealt with everyone just moving on
You have been way off the mark on accuracy in this area previously. The arbitration was purely a procedural matter and would be dropped by the other party. Was that not your your mantra?Jin Cheng ICC Arbitration Proceedings
Article 24 , Case Management Conference and Procedural Timetable - as per your link @MoneyBags1348
*the arbitral tribunal shall hold a case management conference to consult the parties on procedural measures that may be adopted - as per the ann 9/9/22 - The Parties will be convened to a case management conference in September 2022, so this obviously has happened.
Article 24 point 2 - During such conference, or as soon as possible thereafter, the arbitral tribunal shall establish the procedural timetable that it intends to follow for the efficient conduct of the arbitration
Article 24 - point 4 - Case management conferences may be conducted through a meeting in person, by video conference, telephone or similar means of communication. In the absence of an agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the means by which the conference will be conducted. The arbitral tribunal may request the parties to submit case management proposals in advance of a case management conference and may request the attendance at any case management conference of the parties in person or through an internal representative. - So here it suggests , they try and nut it out to see how best to und get things underway and undertake that efficient route in coming to a conclusion
AVZ ann 20.10.22 - The Arbitrator has issued Procedural Order No.1-3 ruling in favour of AVZI and consequently will now proceed to hear and determine AVZI’s jurisdictional challenge (around whether AVZI’s pre-emption rights were breached) before dealing, if necessary, with the merits of the case.
So would appear that most efficient manner , i.e quickest way to the end would obviously be tapping those pre-emption terms and seeing of they were breached .... based on the outcome of that, then they would decide if the case is even a goer.....ICC likely see pre-emption rights conditions as the jugular .
DRC Tribunal Decision -
As the DRC Tribunal correctly acknowledged, both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements. It follows that only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition of a further 15% interest in Dathcom from Dathomir.
So no defendants in the room , but Tribunal decision was granted to Cong for interim suspension of payments which were already in the designated account , an account number which was provided to AVZ for the deposit, Cong hasnt spent he money , its kept in an account because he decided after he had received he wanted more.....it would be interesting to see a statement of that account and any transactional movements to and returning back into. Anyway Tribunal decided to give Cong that status, but also acknowledged that both Dathomir SPAs contain and are subject to arbitration agreements ....... so , only a properly constituted arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to overturn AVZI’s August 2021 acquisition....
......kinda sounds like the Dathomir case holds no merit unless Cong takes it to a higher level.
...Given Cominiere's dodgy dealings, sounds like ICC probablt agree that Pre-emption rights in probably the path of least resistance in getting this thing efficiently dealt with everyone just moving on![]()
The same effect was struck in the media speculation statement.I think I see what's happened here, the update is written by an illiterate drc lawyer who can't string a cohesive sentence together...
It reads like one of those articles out of the dodgy drc newspapers.
Designed to confound and confuse the issue to the point where it simply does the readers head in and they just give up.
Probably has a fair few shorts & is pissed he paying interest etc….For whatever reason this AFR Tom has a very biased view against AVZ. A court sounds more official/negative then a tribunal and he also stated on twitter that the decision voided the deal to buy 15% of Manono, when this does not appear to be correct at all. It appears as if he is deliberately trying to summarise the situation in as negative a light as possible. He appears to have some type of strong motive for him to want AVZ not to succeed. You would think he is opening himself up to negative consequences in the future.
Let it all out mate… it’s your/our time to shineAnyone else want Modo, R2 and Der Geist to just fuck off and talk to themselves somewhere else?
Come to think of it I thought Modo got whacked?
Maybe it was just wishful thinking or the shyster deleted his/her own posts......
Not getting much from the official company announcements at the moment....in fact very disappointed in that regard
But the ongoing and increasing agenda driven bullshit being peddled around and around and around is giving me the fucking shits
Fucking inuendo and insider boogey woogey.....
View attachment 19516
Sitting right there on top of the same undulating and disturbing waters as the fucking Boatman
All IMHO of course