Remark
Top 20
Well, you can take your barbiturates and just fark right off
AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
Suspended WA mineral exploration company AVZ Minerals Limited (AVZ) and two of its directors failed to disclose critical market information about a lithium project in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), ASIC alleges in new proceedings filed today in the Federal Court.
ASIC alleges AVZ breached continuous disclosure obligations and engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by failing to announce an escalating legal dispute in the DRC relating to the acquisition of shares in AVZ’s flagship Manono Project to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX).
ASIC also alleges AVZ’s Managing Director Nigel Ferguson and Technical Director Graeme Johnston breached their director’s duties, authorised or permitted ASX announcements relating to AVZ that were false or misleading, or omitted matters that rendered them misleading.
ASIC Deputy Chair Sarah Court said, ‘proper disclosures were critically important to investors, particularly when the company is operating an asset overseas.
‘In this case it was all but impossible for retail investors to travel to an overseas location in central Africa, in which the company’s operations are being conducted. In those circumstances, investors rely on the company to provide accurate and timely information. We allege Mr Ferguson and Mr Johnston failed to inform investors of the ongoing issues in this matter for nearly 12 months.
‘The pair allegedly failed to take reasonable steps to ensure AVZ complied with its continuous disclosure obligations and that statements to the ASX were not misleading or deceptive.
‘Continuous disclosure and director duties are not only legal obligations they are fundamental principles that protect the integrity of financial markets.
‘ASIC is committed to taking action against any entities we consider fail to meet these obligations, to ensure accountability and to maintain investor confidence,’ Ms Court said.
On 4 May 2022, AVZ confirmed to the market that it retained legal title to a 75% interest in the Manono Project however went on to refer to ‘recent media speculation in respect of several matters in connection with AVZ's interest in the Manono Project, which the Company considers spurious and immaterial’.
The matters included :‘... reference to a decision by 'Le Tribunal de Grande Instance' in the DRC ... in respect of a claim by Dathomir Mining Resources SARL regarding the validity of a share certificate and an extract of a shareholders' registry from Dathcom....’
This was the first reference made by AVZ to a legal dispute that had commenced in mid-2021.
ASIC is seeking declarations of contravention against AVZ, and declarations of contravention and pecuniary penalties against Mr Ferguson and Mr Johnston.
I imagine we'll see an announcement soon.
ASIC alleges AVZ breached continuous disclosure obligations and engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by failing to announce an escalating legal dispute in the DRC relating to the acquisition of shares in AVZ’s flagship Manono Project to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX).
ASIC also alleges AVZ’s Managing Director Nigel Ferguson and Technical Director Graeme Johnston breached their director’s duties, authorised or permitted ASX announcements relating to AVZ that were false or misleading, or omitted matters that rendered them misleading.
ASIC Deputy Chair Sarah Court said, ‘proper disclosures were critically important to investors, particularly when the company is operating an asset overseas.
‘In this case it was all but impossible for retail investors to travel to an overseas location in central Africa, in which the company’s operations are being conducted. In those circumstances, investors rely on the company to provide accurate and timely information. We allege Mr Ferguson and Mr Johnston failed to inform investors of the ongoing issues in this matter for nearly 12 months.
‘The pair allegedly failed to take reasonable steps to ensure AVZ complied with its continuous disclosure obligations and that statements to the ASX were not misleading or deceptive.
‘Continuous disclosure and director duties are not only legal obligations they are fundamental principles that protect the integrity of financial markets.
‘ASIC is committed to taking action against any entities we consider fail to meet these obligations, to ensure accountability and to maintain investor confidence,’ Ms Court said.
On 4 May 2022, AVZ confirmed to the market that it retained legal title to a 75% interest in the Manono Project however went on to refer to ‘recent media speculation in respect of several matters in connection with AVZ's interest in the Manono Project, which the Company considers spurious and immaterial’.
The matters included :‘... reference to a decision by 'Le Tribunal de Grande Instance' in the DRC ... in respect of a claim by Dathomir Mining Resources SARL regarding the validity of a share certificate and an extract of a shareholders' registry from Dathcom....’
This was the first reference made by AVZ to a legal dispute that had commenced in mid-2021.
ASIC is seeking declarations of contravention against AVZ, and declarations of contravention and pecuniary penalties against Mr Ferguson and Mr Johnston.
I imagine we'll see an announcement soon.
Last edited:
impeccable timing, the closest we have been to an outcome and then we get smacked in the ass with this crap from ASIC who no doubtedly been ear bashed by tolate and the likes. cant wait for the the DRC/Ruwanda peace deal to be signed, a comercially viable offer is made to AVZ and then AVZ wipe the floor with ASIC .
Samus
Top 20
While this is evidently the case and many of us complained about it at the time I fail to see how this can possibly help investors in any way.
No doubt this opens the flood gate for the class action as well.
Honestly the situation for us 'investors' seems more and more dire. Zero word from management pertaining to any sort of final resolution either.
I guess one question though is, how will this development impact upon any discussions or negotiations thats are being had with external parties that may be interested in purchasing AVZs interest in Manono.
Surely it will have some level of implications for any potential sale - beyond how our gleeful opposition will undoubtedly portray this, that is.
Every time things appear like there may be a glimmer of hope, then another negative bombshell hits.
Wouldn't mind getting off of this ride!
I don't see how this would impact discussions in any meaningful way. Thinking a buyer will walk away because there is a fine hanging over AVZ's head? Aus gov stands to make vastly more off the tax event of a sale of AVZ.
Skar
Regular
You really gotta start to wonder if there has been any international pressure applied from US or other sharks circling... why now, just as lithium is heating up again.
Here's my thoughts. Keep in mind I don't really know anything about the laws and ramifications etc just speculating here.
The directors of the company are not the company. The company owns the rights to the project regardless of what happens to the directors.
Whether the directors of the company get fined for non-disclosure doesn't really effect how badly the suitors may want the resource. There's existing relationships between the directors and suitors. I am assuming that both China and the west (or whoever) want this resource badly, who ever is most progressed in discussions probably doesn't want to risk a change of directors as it adds uncertainty to their plans. A new executive may be put in that favours the opposition more. Will this speed things up? Maybe, maybe not. I dont think it's heaps bad for the negotiations, maybe just a little.
I don't think this is a situation where a suitor is thinking 'lets wait and see what happens'. IMO it's more, 'lets continue trying to proceed as planned, that has nothing to do with us'
Another thought? Maybe the directors now feel if they don't pull this off soon they'll have a bunch of angry shareholders after them.
The directors of the company are not the company. The company owns the rights to the project regardless of what happens to the directors.
Whether the directors of the company get fined for non-disclosure doesn't really effect how badly the suitors may want the resource. There's existing relationships between the directors and suitors. I am assuming that both China and the west (or whoever) want this resource badly, who ever is most progressed in discussions probably doesn't want to risk a change of directors as it adds uncertainty to their plans. A new executive may be put in that favours the opposition more. Will this speed things up? Maybe, maybe not. I dont think it's heaps bad for the negotiations, maybe just a little.
I don't think this is a situation where a suitor is thinking 'lets wait and see what happens'. IMO it's more, 'lets continue trying to proceed as planned, that has nothing to do with us'
Another thought? Maybe the directors now feel if they don't pull this off soon they'll have a bunch of angry shareholders after them.
Hopefully your right, and it doesnt impact anything. It may well not.
Last edited:
David Krappenschitz
Regular
I don't see how management not informing SHs of certain issues going on in the background has anything to do with AVZs legal rights to the project. I can't see how from a legal standpoint how there'd be any overlap. Two separate issues entirely imo
Skar
Regular
I think the issue is around not disclosing to the market the legal action taking place in DRC. Not the rights of the project. ASIC should not have made a move until the situation was resolved, they have just royally F'd us all over.
Class Action, Probity.... it all just feels like someone trying to apply leverage, timing too suspect.
Xerof
Flushed the Toilet
Ah, thats where he’s been - crawling up ASIC’s arse with all his matrix documentation
Not sure what a class action can achieve. Nigel has to sell his house?AVZ has no money, no commercially acceptable offers, no real assets ( according to the detractors ) so how would people involved get any more money then a few cents each and possibly ruin any chance on a return on their investment?
What happens if Nigel and BoD just up and fucks off? Doubt there would be too many putting their hand up for Nigels job right now
Guessing Deboss wont have any party poppers this year..........
SH @Talks from the Crapper
But investors decided not to take
Class action never got any support
All of the sudden asic wants to slap the directors
But the drc issued decree for mining licence before
Trading halt
So company believed until then that ML would have followed
non sense asic I can smell Chinese perfume here
But investors decided not to take
Class action never got any support
All of the sudden asic wants to slap the directors
But the drc issued decree for mining licence before
Trading halt
So company believed until then that ML would have followed
non sense asic I can smell Chinese perfume here
Carlos Danger
Top 20
Hey ASIC. The SPA’s were completed. Looks like I need to add you dipshits to the list of idiots that don’t understand how contracts work lmao
Carlos Danger
Top 20
Similar threads
