International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

[MoneyBags1348]

09/10/2023

Bin59 Posted

The parties' counsel will review and agree on the transcripts, and AVZ and Jing Cheng will submit post hearing briefs.”

ICC Digital Library​

library.iccwbo.org

A bit more about post hearing briefs;

ICC Digital Library

library.iccwbo.org

 

[MoneyBags1348]

09/10/2023
antimatter posted

Additional rounds of written submissions enable the parties to articulate their positions more extensively and respond to the developing arguments on each side

ICC Digital Library

library.iccwbo.org

 

[MoneyBags1348]

09/10/2023
Underwaterdark Posted

There is also the chance that the Arbiter could review the information and close it quickly without further hearings etc.
(not wanting to waste any more of anyone's time, especially their own)

There is also an Expedited procedure, which I am unsure if we are under this or the standard one.

"The procedure is simplified:

• No Terms of Reference required
• A case management conference will be convened within 15 days after the date on which the file was transmitted to the arbitral tribunal
• The arbitral tribunal may decide on the basis of documents only
• The arbitral tribunal may limit the number, length and scope of written submissions and written witness evidence"

 

[MoneyBags1348]

09/10/2024
Bin59 Posted

Article 35 – Notification, Deposit and Enforceability
of the Award​

1. Once an award has been made, the Secretariat shall notify to the parties the text signed by the arbitral tribunal, provided always that the costs of the arbitration have been fully paid to ICC by the parties or by one of them.
2. Additional copies certified true by the Secretary General shall be made available on request and at any time to the parties, but to no one else.
3. By virtue of the notification made in accordance with Article 35(1), the parties waive any other form of notification or deposit on the part of the arbitral tribunal.
4. An original of each award made in accordance with the Rules shall be deposited with the Secretariat.
5. The arbitral tribunal and the Secretariat shall assist the parties in complying with whatever further formalities may be necessary.
6. Every award shall be binding on the parties. By submitting the dispute to arbitration under the Rules, the parties undertake to carry out any award without delay and shall be deemed to have waived their right to any form of recourse insofar as such waiver can validly be made.

2021 Arbitration Rules - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce

The below ICC Rules of Arbitration entered into force on 1 January 2021. They define and regulate the management of cases received by the International Court of Arbitration® from 1 January 2021 on.  Introductory Provisions Commencing the Arbitration Multiple Parties, Multiple Contracts and...

iccwbo.org

 

[MoneyBags1348]

09/10/2023
9cardomaha posted

Transcript which is mentioned in ann is for the entire hearing process - ICC chairman statement should still be the crux of this, whereby the ICC chair provides guidance on what is needed in the post-hearing brief to facilitate the arbitrator to make his decision.

From my understanding, the post-hearing brief can only be a page or so, where parties can add context to testimony which is highlighted by the Chair as ambiguous or needing more context.

Transcript signing process is just a formality to confirm that the stenographer has recorded everything verbatim without misinterpreting the oral testimonies of witnesses - excessive back and forths for minor edits like 'a' and 'an' is frowned upon by the ICC.

So i'm going to double down on my jurisdiction verdict timeline of 'BEFORE first week of November'.

The part about the arbitrator setting a procedural timeline is worrying, but my thoughts are that we might have been legally forced to include this as it is a possibility for further hearings on the main part of the case 'abuse of majority shareholder position by AVZ' - let's hope it doesn't get to that because we get a ruling in our favour.

I take solace in the fact that a company update on the procedural timeline does include the possibility of something like 'the arbitrator has decided that no further procedures are required due to our successful jurisdictional challenge.

 

[MoneyBags1348]

10/10/2023
Cruiser Posted

NEWSECONOMY

Paris ICC arbitration procedure between AVZ Int and Jing Cheng (ZIJIN) on the Congo lithium project, clarification by the Australians​

October 9, 2023
Kiki Kienge

Jin Cheng Mining Company, a subsidiary of the Chinese mining giant, ZIJIN Mining, which claims to own 15% of the shares (of COMINIERE) in the Manono lithium joint venture in the province of Tanganyika in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The purchase of this 15% of Congolese lithium was done illegally and trampled on the law of the country and joint venture agreements, according to the IGF (General Inspectorate of Finance), organ of the presidency of the republic, headed by the charismatic , Jules Alingete .

• In addition to the pre-emption rights claimed by the Australian group AVZ MINERALS;
• the sale price judged by the IGF to be derisory given the value of lithium on the international market at the time of the sale, US$2,200,000 for 1% of the sale than the US$10,000,000 on the market;
• There is in particular an audio attributed to the former ad interim general director, Célestin Kibeya who was appointed by presidential order as now the general director of COMINIERE, who would ask a “commission agent” in the sale of the 15%, to reveal on the invoice 33,440,000 $US than the 35,500,000 $US that the Chinese of ZIJIN will actually pay, therefore a difference of 2,060,000 $US which will disappear from the coffers of the Congolese State.

https://x.com/KiengeKki/status/1644687268861411332?s=20

Details of the procedure, source Jusmundi:

• on October 5, 2022, the sole arbitrator granted AVZI's request to bifurcate the procedure, noting that the document production phase had ended on February 22, 2023;
• on December 9, 2022, Jin Cheng submitted his statement on jurisdiction and AVZI submitted his response on jurisdiction on March 10, 2023;
• Jin Cheng will submit a rejoinder on jurisdiction on March 22, 2023; And
• the jurisdictional hearing will take place on April 19 and 20, 2023.

Update on arbitration procedures from October 9, 2023 from AVZ INTERNATIONAL :
MINERALS LIMITED.
ICC Arbitration Hearing, Jin Cheng Jurisdictional Challenge.

AVZ Minerals Limited (ASX: AVZ, OTC: AZZVF) (AVZ) provides an update on the ICC arbitration proceedings (No. 26986/SP) initiated by Jin Cheng Mining Company.

(Jin Cheng), a subsidiary of Zijin Mining Limited (Zijin), which claims to have acquired a 15% stake in Dathcom Mining SA (Dathcom) from La Congolaise d'Exploitation Minière (Cominière).

AVZ International Pty Ltd (AVZI) declared itself incompetent in this matter, on the grounds that Jin Cheng does not have the right to resort to arbitration, in particular because it is not a shareholder of Dathcom as such , because the alleged acquisition of its 15% stake from Cominière was ineffective and took place in violation of AVZl's right of pre-emption.

A hearing on AVZI's objection to jurisdiction was held on October 5 and 6, 2023 before the arbitral tribunal in Paris, the parties' lawyers will review and agree on the transcripts, and AVZ and Jing Cheng will submit briefs after the audience.

The sole arbitrator will determine a procedural timetable in the coming weeks, with the company providing an update.

As previously stated, AVZ is confident that the challenge to AVZI's jurisdiction will be successful, which will confirm that Jin Cheng has no right to initiate the ICC arbitration proceeding against AVZI based on the agreement concluded between the two parties on the grounds that he is a purported shareholder of Dathcom.

 

[Powerage]

08/10/2023
Bin59 Posted

ICC - International Chamber of Commerce

Arbitration

New ICC report takes bold move to tackle unreliability of witness testimony in arbitration​

19 January 2021
ICC has launched a new report on the accuracy of fact witness memory in international arbitration. The report, which is the first of its kind conducted by an arbitral institution, analyses the psychological science of human memory, and offers arbitrators and counsel guidance to enhance the probative value of fact witness evidence
Share this:

The groundbreaking report, by the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, was presented today during a live webinar.
The ICC Task Force on Maximising the Probative Value of Witness Evidence – initiated by former Commission Chair Christopher Newmark and co-chaired by Baker & McKenzie Partner Ragnar Harbst and Reed Smith Partner Jose Astigarraga – set out to explore the science behind the human memory retrieval process and investigate how typical arbitral practice can skew witness memory, resulting in less reliable evidence. The Task Force also considered whether changes could be made to current arbitral practices or alternative approaches could be adopted to reduce the risk of witness memory distortion and make witness evidence more reliable and the process more cost effective.

To understand the psychology of witness memory recall during an arbitration, Dr Kimberley Wade of the Department of Psychology at the University of Warwick was commissioned to conduct an independent study for the report. The outcomes of the study, which solicited views from 300 international professionals from across industries and took five years to complete, led to the following conclusions:

The memory of an honest witness in an international arbitration hearing can be easily distorted due to the interactions that commonly take place during the preparation and presentation of witness evidence. However, awareness within the arbitration community of the factors that are known to create memory distortions, as well as appropriate and selective use of measures that are set out in the report to avoid such distortion should together signal a key step forward.

A case-by-case assessment should be made to determine which of the many steps identified in the report is most appropriate to be used.

It is understood that witness evidence is presented in arbitration proceedings for a variety of purposes, many of which do not rely upon the accuracy of witness memory. Should the accuracy of witness memory not be relevant, the concerns regarding memory corruption are not relevant.
As witness evidence often takes a central role in many arbitral proceedings, this pioneering report aims to bring certain fault points into mainstream discussions in order for practitioners and tribunals to better streamline efforts and costs. The report may also serve as a successful basis for future collaborative research projects involving psychologist and arbitration specialists.

Commenting on the launch of the report, Christopher Newmark said:

New ICC report takes bold move to tackle unreliability of witness testimony

The report analyses the psychological science of human memory, and offers arbitrators and counsel guidance to enhance the probative value of fact witness evidence

iccwbo.org

Bags, are u in NC? Can u flick me a DM (for some reason I can’t send you one on TSE)…

 

[MoneyBags1348]

14/10/2023
Hudnut Posted

Translation is:

"During the afternoon session of October 5 in arbitration in Paris, Zijin and
@cominiereSA
spent most of the time attacking United Cominiere (UC) and discrediting its CEO having the evidence and details not applied to the detriment of the people on the deal is contested by
@IgfRdc"

United Cominiere and Cominiere are 2 separate entities.

"Meanwhile, Tantalex’s joint venture subsidiary, United Cominiere SAS has completed a mandatory transfer of 10% of its share capital to the Congolese government upon the transformation of a research permit to a mining permit.

United Cominiere holds concessions 12447 and 12448 where the TiTan plant is located.

Following this transfer, the company’s subsidiary Sandstone Worldwide Limited will own 63% of United Cominiere SAS, Cominiere SA will own 27% and the Congolese government will own 10%."

-----------------------------------------------

It wouldn't surprise me if they are muddying the waters trying to point the finger at the German and his cronies since Nige and team are playing by the book and have their noses clean. They have to direct the heat somewhere. We aren't the only people Cominiere and CAMI fight with.

As Kiki reported in September:

Many analysts see this agreement between the Swiss giant Glencore and the Canadians from Tantalex as another strategy for opponents of the DATHCOM project with the Australians from AVZ MINERALS, which the Congolese government is blocking for political reasons.

Glencore, for its part, according to its executives, has no intention of operating or taking major stakes in lithium mines, preferring to use its traditional business model of providing debt financing in exchange for the supply of the mined product.

Commenting on the agreement, Hadley Natus, President of Tantalex, said: "This will be Glencore's first lithium investment in the DRC. They will bring their experience to the country. With battery metals, I don't see how people can turn a blind eye to the DRC.

"Tantalex Canadians reportedly own two permits in Tanganyika at Manono, PR 12447 and PR12448, "approved" by ministerial decree, signed by the Minister, Antoinette Nsamba Kalambayi, to be transformed into Mining Concessions:

"Toronto, Ontario, October 31, 2022 - Tantalex is pleased to announce that its 70%-owned DRC subsidiary, United Cominiere SAS, has been informed by the Ministry of Mines that research permits PR 12447 and PR12448 have now been transformed into mining concessions." The Canadian group announced on its website."

This is an incredible milestone for the Company, as it will generate positive cash flow for the Company in early 2023. This will be the most modern alluvial plant in operation in the DRC, and we believe it is likely to be just the first of many that we will install. As we progress with the development of the Manono lithium tailings project, our Titan project demonstrates to our investors, the DRC government and local stakeholders that Tantalex is serious about building production facilities in a sustainable way."

Tantalex's TiTanProject at Manono

- Tantalex can now proceed immediately with construction of the TiTantin and tantalum alluvial concentrate plant.
- Project to produce around 1,400 dmtof of tin concentrate and 220 dmtof of tantalum concentrate per year.
- Generate around US$30 million in annual revenues at current commodity prices. Production is scheduled to start in March 2023.
- Equipment and machinery already arrived and tested at Manono, ready for on-site assembly.

But for the moment, on the websites of the Mining Registry of DR Congo (CAMI) and COMINIERE, these two permits are still registered as 100% owned by the Congolese state-owned company.

What about the sums spent by Tantalex to take possession of the two permits, COMINIERE and the Congolese state in this agreement between the Canadians and the Swiss giant?

 

[MoneyBags1348]

14/10/2023
Hudnut Posted

It doesn't have anything to do with the other tenements I don't think.
That just illustrates that CKK, CAMI and cronies screw around with everyone.

I'd be guessing, but references to United Cominiere and CEO are because Klaus and Co are ex AVZ and we know they aren't the straightest arrows.

So Zijin will be saying they didn't know about FROR or were at least told it didn't matter.

CKK and Co will be pointing at Klaus, Eric Allard etc because they've worked out they can't pin Nige and current management and that's their only avenue to throw shade at AVZ.

Klaus is/was part of TTX, so they'll be trying to include anything they think he might have done with TTX as a majority holder in United Cominiere that could be dodgy, whether true or not.

How it ties in exactly I don't know, but my best guess is something along these lines.
The shadow of Klaus looms large.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lithium Tantalex Resources Corp. (CSE: TTX - TSE: DW8 - OTCQB: TTLXF) ("Tantalex" or the "Company"), is pleased to announce that its DRC subsidiary, United Cominiere SAS, 70% owned, has been informed by the Ministry of Mines that Research Permits PR 12447 and 12448 have now been approved by ministerial decree for the transformation into mining concessions". This is the content of the first paragraph of Tantalex Lithium Resources Corporation's online press release.

Formerly Tantalex, before Mr. Klaus Eckoff of AJN Resources entered it in January 2022 as director,this listed company in Canada and Germany presents itself as "a mining company in the operating and development phase engaged in the acquisition, exploitation, development and distribution of lithium, tin, tantalum and other high-tech mineral properties in Africa. It is currently focusing on the development of its lithium assets in the prolific region of Manono in the Democratic Republic of Congo; The Manono lithium mining waste project and the Pegmatite corridor exploitation program".

It has as President Hadley Natus and Eric Allard as Chief Executive Officer, according to the above-mentioned statement.

In view of the following various final judgments of the Congolese justice system:

The RCE 7495 which endorsed the RCCM of January 20, 2022 as well as the decisions to delete the false RCCM of October 16, 2021;

RP19203 which declared the foreign company "Sandstone Word Wide Ltd" non-existent under Congolese law and dismissed it in court as well as Canadian citizen Eric Allard, its president, for lack of quality;

RPO 10247/10267 which sentenced Canadian citizen Eric Allard to 3 years of main criminal servitude and the payment of USD 50,000 in Damages for forgery and use of forgery;

RAC 2942, judgment before saying right, which ordered the suspension of this case on the basis of the "criminal who keeps the civilian in condition", whose request is the restoration of the additional or amending registration of the fraudulent RCCM of October 16, 2021;

Considering that there is to date no judgment contrary to all these judicial decisions that have become res judicata, and that they are said on behalf of the Congolese people and executed in the name of His Excellency the President of the Republic, Head of State;
Our citizen organizations and platforms want COMINIERE SA to be able to:

Remain impartial to disputes between partners and to deal only with shareholding as dedicated to the RCCM of January 20, 2022 because it is ratified by a final judgment;

Compose and deal only with the partners of UC SAS of whom RCCM is cited to resolve the dispute related to several tens of tons of mining products, containing essentially coltan, which have been the subject of fraud and illegal exploitation at the expense of individuals whose judicial file is pending at the prosecutor's offices and for which we hold an independent expert report of which we have read a copy;

Respect its recommendation made to shareholders, in its letter of February 4, 2021, to refer to justice to be divided by final judgments.


According to the information in our possession on the basis of the above-mentioned Expert Report, the company Afrimet Ressources of Hadley Natus, currently President of Tantalex, and its subsidiaries, including COPROCO, owe "UC SAS" money.

According to estimates made at the time for a member of the current government interested in this file, it would be around USD 9,146,488, distributed as follows:
8.650.000USD for 69.2 metric tons of coltan;
271.800USD for 15 tons of unidentified minerals if it is cassiterite; otherwise, that is, considering this as coltan the value will be 1.875,000USD which reduces the overall value to 10.749.688USD;

224.688USD for 12.4 tons of cassitérite.
The quantity of minerals indicated above was exploited, in the concessions of "UC SAS", illegally and fraudulently and then evacuated, clandestinely, in flagrant and harmful violation of the provisions of the commercial contracts that bound the two parties (UC and Afrimet/COPROCO).

Therefore, Excellency the Minister of Mines, we invite the Government of the Republic, particularly your Ministry and that of Justice as well as all the services and establishments dependent on it, including the Mining Cadastre, to take into account all the elements mentioned above, to respect the decisions of Justice valid to date and to draw all the consequences of law and administration towards foreign citizens Eric Allard and Hadley Natus on "UC SAS" (and its mining permits) to which they owe millions of US dollars for tens of tons of coltan fraudulently taken on Research Permits, contrary to Congolese laws including the revised Mining Code and Regulations.

This would be a significant contribution on your part to the consolidation of the business climate and at the same time would allow communities where minerals have been extracted to benefit from the mining fee on exported products.

 

[Dazmac66]

"The sole arbitrator will determine a procedural timetable in the coming weeks, with the company providing an update."

What exactly is a procedural timetable in this setting. Are we likely to hear anything definitive after the 90 minute hearing? It is two weeks since the hearing took place, can't be far off hearing some news.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/2023
9cardomaha posted

Update from me on ICC:

15% case JCM v AVZ, i believe we submitted request for the entire case be thrown out since the north has been returned (2nd Nov submissions)
- expected verdict on request next week.

Request to Increase Emergency Injunction fine from 50,000 Euros to 150,000 Euros per day (2nd Nov submissions)
- Expected verdict on request next week.

Jurisdictional hearing which occured in October won't have a verdict until 2024 Feb, but the request to have it thrown out will likely make this point moot.

I will also add that ZJ tried to change the arbitrator who granted us the Emergency Injunction for 50,000 to some other judge, but was unsuccessful - so the chances it gets increased is looking good.

But i wonder when we will seek enforcement of the injunction. that'll put a dent in ZJxCominiere's coffers.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/2023
Carlos Posted

I will also add that ZJ tried to change the arbitrator who granted us the Emergency Injunction for 50,000 to some other judge, but was unsuccessful - so the chances it gets increased is looking good.

But i wonder when we will seek enforcement of the injunction. that'll put a dent in ZJxCominiere's coffers.

Why ZJ trying to change the arbiter?

Zijin's request to combine their cases with Cominiere was specifically knocked back by the ICC. As if they had a chance lmao

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/3023
9cardomaha posted

JCM v AVZ (15% issue) is heard by the mysterious cruiseship delaying arbitaror - we submitted an emergency request to throw the case out completely with deadline for submissions today and expected decisions next week.

Emergency injunction is AVZ v Cominiere, which has a lady arbitrator if i am not mistaken, after the injunction was awarded on May 5, Zijin has lent their legal team to Cominiere (ie Fasken), who is now arguing on behalf of Cominiere to not increase the daily penalty and even remove the injunction all together.

(also fasken reps Zj and Cominiere in the joint case).

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/3023
9cardomaha posted

I go back to my single domino falling theory - and yes their latest announcement gave us grounds to expedite instead of waiting to Feb 2024.

An emergency request to have it thrown out renders a verdict almost instantly (in the legal world). So could be the first piece to move, afterwhich, combined case from ZJ and Cominiere is also withdrawn, and as the sale of 15% is no longer in question, we withdraw one of the cases against Cominiere for the sale.

We would maintain Dathomir cases and the Emergency injunction against Cominiere - but i surmise that if the first domino falls, we will just seek enforcement of the new injunction amount, and then just hold the Dathomir case. (if we get an increase for injunction penalty, it will likely give us more leverage to negotiate too) but this all heresay your honour.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/2023
Carlos Posted

If Zijin case is over then they are gone from Dathcom forever

Focus then becomes our claim against Cominiere for the purported termination of the Dathcom JVA and subsequent partition of the tenement. Pre-emption breach claim against Cominiere is gone as the sale didn't happen and they still hold 25% of Dathcom that we have FROR on 15% of.

Zijin and Cominiere's other combined case claiming damages goes away on lack of grounds as Zijin is not, and was never, a party of Dathcom

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/3023
9cardomaha posted

You always articulate it better than I do Carlos lol.

That is precisely it. Just one thing - i think there are two cases for termination of JVA. One is the root cause, becasue Dathomir is the one who went to local DRC court to terminate JV.

So the emergency injunction against Cominiere is to stop them from acting on the assumption of termination; BECAUSE the ICC case against Dathomir is still underway.

We also have another case against dathomir which is basically a big fat fuck-off to Cong's seller's remorse.

ICSID is against DRC who, following Cominiere's request and bullshit reasons, canceled the ministerial decrees which provided the opening for JVA and JV to be terminated.

See how its all a web of lies and deciet and snackfuckery.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/3023
9cardomaha posted

Are we expecting the Chinese /DRC to abide by any of these ICC verdicts ?

So this is where it gets a little tricky - ICC's power over DRC land transfer and ownership rights is 50/50 from what i can tell. But that is up to the arbitrator, if they do not believe the DRC will follow through, then they pretty weak from what i can tell, but ICC and ICSID for that matter will generally rule for monetary damages as remedy.

The last emergency injunction against Cominiere had no effect . In fact it had the opposite effect . This injunction will probably see Zijin start work on the North while they are having BBQ on AVZ camp site.

this relates to my enforcement showerthought. They aren;t losses unless you sell type of deal, until we request to enforce the emergency injunction.

And for monetary penalties, ICC has jurisdiction over 90% of banking institutions, and can block or hold transactions from ZJ to Cominiere, or any other organiztion to Cominiere to recoup damages.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/2023
Carlos Posted

You always articulate it better than I do Carlos lol.

That is precisely it. Just one thing - i think there are two cases for termination of JVA. One is the root cause, becasue Dathomir is the one who went to local DRC court to terminate JV.

So the emergency injunction against Cominiere is to stop them from acting on the assumption of termination; BECAUSE the ICC case against Dathomir is still underway.

We also have another case against dathomir which is basically a big fat fuck-off to Cong's seller's remorse.

ICSID is against DRC who, following Cominiere's request and bullshit reasons, canceled the ministerial decrees which provided the opening for JVA and JV to be terminated.

See how its all a web of lies and deciet and snackfuckery.
Click to expand...

Dathomir termination attempt was September 4th this year. Way after Cominiere emergency order. Emergency order was all about Cominiere staying within DRC legal system rather than complying with Article 11.1 of Dathcom JVA and going to ICC.

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/3023
9cardomaha posted

Dathomir termination attempt was September 4th this year. Way after Cominiere emergency order. Emergency order was all about Cominiere staying within DRC legal system rather than complying with Article 11.1 of Dathcom JVA and going to ICC.
View attachment 48635
View attachment 48636
View attachment 48637
View attachment 48638
Click to expand...

Hmm you're right JV termination issued by Dathomir is after emergency injunction. There is a piece missing inbetween, its the termination of JVA by Cominiere in local DRC which triggered the injunction.

That should make the timeline correct - good eye as always Carlos.

TLDR: first domino falls and the proceeding shitstorm subsides and ZJ have their 'blush moment'. who should we be celebrating as the messiah?

 

[Dave Evans]

03/11/2023
Carlos Posted

He’s muttering on X that 11.1 and all of that is over ridden by some paragraph 2, under which DRC law prevails

Don’t shoot the messenger, I have nfi what he’s referring to

View attachment 48641

He's talking about this

But his (And Cong's attempt on September 4th) entire reasoning for termination is based on non performance in Article 18.3 which says 11.1 must be followed

I would love to know what discrepancy in provisions he is trying argue lmao