"So youre telling me the upper 2 floors are my penthouse apartments or i get the whole building?"
Which is the ICC hearing is occurring in July?You had me right up until this....
"Manono will be decided in the ICC as the independent umpire and AVZ will be the victor"
No doubt AVZ will be the victor as everything via documentation / law leads to it, but fuck me, i am hoping the point of the visit to China apart from the other agenda..........was to get THE PARTY FINALLY STARTED at Manono with AVZ ml in hand, before ICC arbitration in July as that will be another major drag on time for everyone concerned, not sure the mental faculties on this forum could cope with much more....![]()
Which is the ICC hearing is occurring in July?
Oh, do we know why we’ve heard crickets about the MMCS case at the ICC?
- The one initiated by AVZ to stop the dissolution of Dathcom?
- The claim by the corrupt ones for $1.6b(?) against AVZ?
- The claim for $500m because Nigel parked in Celestine’s allocated spot?
- Something else?
I can’t keep up…
Cheers dude.it's the one where Zijin (JC) take AVZ to task to validate their (illegal) purchase of the 15%, but the first part is to decide whether they actually have the right to do this, as they were not part of the JVA
- something else
silly Kunts
I get what you are saying. china wants to play democracy when they want to but ultimately all chinese companies are subordinate to the cjinese government eg. Jack Ma - Alibaba.Hi Tonster
Exept that Zijin Mining is a Chinese state owned enterprise (SOE). This means that the Chinese government is the beneficial owner, and its activities are ultimately directed by Beijing. Its largest shareholder is Shanghang Minxi Xinghang State-Owned Property Investment Company (Interestingly, the Chinese state gets >30% of its revenue from property sales...just like the Andrews govt in Vic (LOL)).
I don't see evidence of a line in the sand, but just the same shit.
I agree that AVZ will be vindicated, but I think it will be through a negotiated settlement.
It's good to have divergent views.
Cheers
F
The reason I stated the decision will be made at the ICC because it is independent so the DRC government can allude to this decision when china asks why they didnt get Manono. For me its the election that is playing a big role in decisions at the moment. The chinese are propaganda machines and can influence the election against Felix. If there was no election I think the IGF and Felix would tell china to bugger off.You had me right up until this....
"Manono will be decided in the ICC as the independent umpire and AVZ will be the victor"
No doubt AVZ will be the victor as everything via documentation / law leads to it, but fuck me, i am hoping the point of the visit to China apart from the other agenda..........was to get THE PARTY FINALLY STARTED at Manono with AVZ ml in hand, before ICC arbitration in July as that will be another major drag on time for everyone concerned, not sure the mental faculties on this forum could cope with much more....![]()
My understanding is if Z gets told it doesn't have the right to even seek a ruling by ICC, then this case gets dropped.Cheers dude.
So this is the one where, assuming we we win, we find out that Z have no jurisdiction to take action against us so that action cannot proceed any further. Then everyone looks at each other and says “Now what?”
Is it that one?
#fuckZijin
Thanks again.My understanding is if Z gets told it doesn't have the right to even seek a ruling by ICC, then this case gets dropped.
This would then leave AVZ's attack on Cominiere, which has two parts - a ruling (ideally in our favour) over the dissolution of the JVA, and the legality of Cominiere selling JC the 15%. (see 17 April announcement)
And finally, there's the vexatious claim for damages from Z and C.
Oh, and still have the DATHOMIR case, launched by AVZ
So i can update a few for everyone.Which is the ICC hearing is occurring in July?
Oh, do we know why we’ve heard crickets about the MMCS case at the ICC?
- The one initiated by AVZ to stop the dissolution of Dathcom?
- The claim by the corrupt ones for $1.6b(?) against AVZ?
- The claim for $500m because Nigel parked in Celestine’s allocated spot?
- Something else?
I can’t keep up…
The second part is correct, the Zijin v AVZ hearing in July is to determine whether the ICC has jurisdiction for the case given Zijin isn't a shareholder. According to JVA you can't initiate an ICC case against a JV member unless you are also a JV member.it's the one where Zijin (JC) take AVZ to task to validate their (illegal) purchase of the 15%, but the first part is to decide whether they actually have the right to do this, as they were not part of the JVA
If ICC rules that it does not have jurisdiction over Zijin v AVZ, this will slam the door in Zijin's face. We will likely submit to have the joint case dismissed since it's basically the AVZ v Cominiere one with Zijin included for shits and giggles.So this is the one where, assuming we we win, we find out that Z have no jurisdiction to take action against us so that action cannot proceed any further. Then everyone looks at each other and says “Now what?”
Is it that one?
#fuckZijin
Thanks for that XSpeaking of crickets, no news on the Class action, and nothing on the off market purchases by Deeland
Summary, all bullshit tactics from you know where
Top contribution there 9CardSo i can update a few for everyone.
- AVZ v Cominiere - The one initiated by AVZ to stop the dissolution of Dathcom? - Emergency Injunction awarded May 2023 validating ICC jurisdiction, timetable to be set by September 2023
- Zijin + Cominiere v AVZ - The claim by the corrupt ones for $1.6b(?) against AVZ? - Jurisdiction hearing in July 2023 (if it is allowed to go forward)
- AVZ v Dathomir - The one initiated by AVZ to tell Cong to fuck off, no sellers remorse allowed - Timetable set by August 2023
- Zijin v AVZ - Jurisdiction hearing in July where ICC tells Zijin to 'go back to China'
- MMCS v Cominiere - Rendering verdict expected to come out in August 2023
- The claim for $500m because Nigel parked in Celestine’s allocated spot? - LOL
- Nothing Else
The second part is correct, the Zijin v AVZ hearing in July is to determine whether the ICC has jurisdiction for the case given Zijin isn't a shareholder. According to JVA you can't initiate an ICC case against a JV member unless you are also a JV member.
The first part needs a small addition: Zijin didn't launch the case to validate the 15% ownership. Even if the ICC decides to hear the case, the ICC only recognizes that Zijin is a JV member but they didn't request an ICC decree or mandate to confirm.
Zijin would then have to go back to the DRC with this ICC recognition and continue the fight locally, or launch another case to validate their 15% similar to AVZ v Dathomir.
Edit: actually no they can't launch another ICC case since they aren't a JV member, so go back to DRC, use ICC as precedence and confirm that they don't have shit
If ICC rules that it does not have jurisdiction over Zijin v AVZ, this will slam the door in Zijin's face. We will likely submit to have the joint case dismissed since it's basically the AVZ v Cominiere one with Zijin included for shits and giggles.
Interesting video suggests all is not well between china and africa.
Can Zijin delay the ICC hearing again ?So i can update a few for everyone.
- AVZ v Cominiere - The one initiated by AVZ to stop the dissolution of Dathcom? - Emergency Injunction awarded May 2023 validating ICC jurisdiction, timetable to be set by September 2023
- Zijin + Cominiere v AVZ - The claim by the corrupt ones for $1.6b(?) against AVZ? - Jurisdiction hearing in July 2023 (if it is allowed to go forward)
- AVZ v Dathomir - The one initiated by AVZ to tell Cong to fuck off, no sellers remorse allowed - Timetable set by August 2023
- Zijin v AVZ - Jurisdiction hearing in July where ICC tells Zijin to 'go back to China'
- MMCS v Cominiere - Rendering verdict expected to come out in August 2023
- The claim for $500m because Nigel parked in Celestine’s allocated spot? - LOL
- Nothing Else
The second part is correct, the Zijin v AVZ hearing in July is to determine whether the ICC has jurisdiction for the case given Zijin isn't a shareholder. According to JVA you can't initiate an ICC case against a JV member unless you are also a JV member.
The first part needs a small addition: Zijin didn't launch the case to validate the 15% ownership. Even if the ICC decides to hear the case, the ICC only recognizes that Zijin is a JV member but they didn't request an ICC decree or mandate to confirm.
Zijin would then have to go back to the DRC with this ICC recognition and continue the fight locally, or launch another case to validate their 15% similar to AVZ v Dathomir.
Edit: actually no they can't launch another ICC case since they aren't a JV member, so go back to DRC, use ICC as precedence and confirm that they don't have shit
If ICC rules that it does not have jurisdiction over Zijin v AVZ, this will slam the door in Zijin's face. We will likely submit to have the joint case dismissed since it's basically the AVZ v Cominiere one with Zijin included for shits and giggles.
Great PostSo i can update a few for everyone.
- AVZ v Cominiere - The one initiated by AVZ to stop the dissolution of Dathcom? - Emergency Injunction awarded May 2023 validating ICC jurisdiction, timetable to be set by September 2023
- Zijin + Cominiere v AVZ - The claim by the corrupt ones for $1.6b(?) against AVZ? - Jurisdiction hearing in July 2023 (if it is allowed to go forward)
- AVZ v Dathomir - The one initiated by AVZ to tell Cong to fuck off, no sellers remorse allowed - Timetable set by August 2023
- Zijin v AVZ - Jurisdiction hearing in July where ICC tells Zijin to 'go back to China'
- MMCS v Cominiere - Rendering verdict expected to come out in August 2023
- The claim for $500m because Nigel parked in Celestine’s allocated spot? - LOL
- Nothing Else
The second part is correct, the Zijin v AVZ hearing in July is to determine whether the ICC has jurisdiction for the case given Zijin isn't a shareholder. According to JVA you can't initiate an ICC case against a JV member unless you are also a JV member.
The first part needs a small addition: Zijin didn't launch the case to validate the 15% ownership. Even if the ICC decides to hear the case, the ICC only recognizes that Zijin is a JV member but they didn't request an ICC decree or mandate to confirm.
Zijin would then have to go back to the DRC with this ICC recognition and continue the fight locally, or launch another case to validate their 15% similar to AVZ v Dathomir.
Edit: actually no they can't launch another ICC case since they aren't a JV member, so go back to DRC, use ICC as precedence and confirm that they don't have shit
If ICC rules that it does not have jurisdiction over Zijin v AVZ, this will slam the door in Zijin's face. We will likely submit to have the joint case dismissed since it's basically the AVZ v Cominiere one with Zijin included for shits and giggles.
Great Post
What are your thoughts on a take over at a reasonable price to resolve this mess.
Surely Zijin does not want this to proceed to ICC ?