AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
Just saw the email.
So this venue is tightening our belt.
I wonder if there will be screaming toddlers in the next room.
I won't be there to find out.
BRICK
Zeebot Located
Good point better get onto him on X!
Hodlandwin69
Regular
So.... Where's the vote on the remuneration report and all that??
Mr_Tones83
Regular
Remuneration report vote is only required for public LISTED companies
Mr_Tones83
Regular
ICSID Administrative and Financial Regulation 16(2)(b) specifies that, in the event of non-payment by a party in arbitration proceedings, the Secretary-General may request the other party to make an advance payment on behalf of the non-paying party.
ICSID does not typically publicize the identity of a non-paying party in its arbitration proceedings. Payment details and financial responsibilities are treated as confidential under ICSID regulations unless disclosed by the involved parties themselves or released in the award or procedural orders. ICSID maintains confidentiality to protect the privacy of the arbitration process.
Also an update on procedural orders re: production of documents.
If fees remain unpaid after an ICSID case is suspended for non-payment, the proceedings may be permanently discontinued. ICSID allows for temporary suspension initially, giving parties time to fulfill their financial obligations. However, if payments are still not made after this period, the tribunal may issue an order for discontinuance. This effectively ends the arbitration process, and no further rulings or awards are issued on the dispute.
The non-paying party could face reputational damage, as well as limitations in pursuing future ICSID claims.
Cases at ICSID occasionally end due to non-payment, but this is relatively rare.
Last edited:
Re: ICSID Administrative and Financial Regulation 16(2)(b) specifies that, in the event of non-payment by a party in arbitration proceedings, the Secretary-General may request the other party to make an advance payment on behalf of the non-paying party.
Who makes this shit up, and who the actual fuck thinks it will fly?
Honestly, can anyone see Jan and Ben signing a company cheque covering the DRC's arbitral fees, and maybe while in the mood paying the daily penalties too...just another $AU100 million.
I need ice in my scotch.
Cheers
F
Who makes this shit up, and who the actual fuck thinks it will fly?
Honestly, can anyone see Jan and Ben signing a company cheque covering the DRC's arbitral fees, and maybe while in the mood paying the daily penalties too...just another $AU100 million.
I need ice in my scotch.
Cheers
F
So the whole ICSID glacier can just melt away because of non payment? What's about the millions spent on legal fees to this point? As if the Chinese or DRC crooks give a flying fuck about reputational damage! What now?
Are they thinking arbitration is no longer necessary due to some kind of pending outcome? It's a 1000000:1 shot I know!
Have a good Friday everyone!!
Are they thinking arbitration is no longer necessary due to some kind of pending outcome? It's a 1000000:1 shot I know!
Have a good Friday everyone!!
Really? Well maybe that's one reason management were fine with the de-listing, avoiding the likely board spill that would've occurred after the next renumeration report had 25% or more of a no vote. Sneaky but effective perhaps.
That would allow the secretary general to continue to receive his $1.5 million usd salary.
Mr_Tones83
Regular
I would say it's DRC non-payment rather than from AVZ. Further delay tactics? China/Zijin unable to get funds to DRC to cover their bill? Cominiere and cronies would likely be all over X laughing if it were AVZ non-payment.
I'd assume litigation funding will cover advance payments to keep the case going, as we want a ruling against DRC, not just proof that they're broke (we already know that rampant corruption is the reason the country is broke).
Hopefully further pressure to come to the party and get a deal done.
I'd assume litigation funding will cover advance payments to keep the case going, as we want a ruling against DRC, not just proof that they're broke (we already know that rampant corruption is the reason the country is broke).
Hopefully further pressure to come to the party and get a deal done.
Schnitzelfresser
Regular
I'm curious whether geo's hint is related to this or whether it is invalid again.
it looks like another stalling tactic of the drc heist crew...incredible.
it looks like another stalling tactic of the drc heist crew...incredible.
Hodlandwin69
Regular
Anyone know how much was owed and if AVZ had enough to even pay (if it was then or if they had enough to cover DRC)......?
Last edited:
Hemicuda
Regular
Geo is just full of shit like all the others ffs
PutUsernameHere
Regular
What a fucking joke that is. Definitely our opponents who haven't paid, more stalling tactics. This ICSID system is so ridiculous. Delay, delay, delay, delay, oh yeah, I can't pay, let's delay some more and see if my adversary will spot me
Incredible.As others stated, they don't give a single fuck about reputational damage. They really are doing a good job on beating down on our willpower. Feels mentally draining every time there's an update.
Surely Nigel would have been obliged to inform share holders of the situation and passed the tin around if AVZ was short ? Looks to me like more stall and delay tactics . What I want to know is can we still put the case before ICSID even if the DRC are a no show . If we can then that's a huge win for AVZ . What is the point of f--king ICSID if the guilty party can just walk away and not be punished . It makes no sense . What we need now is the Locke funds to show these c--ts we can drag their arses to the ICSID . I suspect @geo_au's promised jump for joy announcement is in regard to funding .
Similar threads
