Stans Energy Corp V.HRE.H

Talks didn't go as planned. Still being bullied.

[HORNDOG22]

so we have to collect
Stans requests arbitration payment from Kyrgyz gov't
2014-07-14 12:35 ET - News Release
Mr. Rodney Irwin reports
STANS ENERGY REQUESTS PAYMENT OF ARBITRATION AWARD FROM KYRGYZ GOVERNMENT
Stans Energy Corp. has sent a letter to Prime Minister Djoomart K. Otorbaev of the Kyrgyz Republic requesting payment of $118,206,056.80 (U.S.).
According to Article 56 of the arbitration rules of the Arbitration Court at the Moscow Chamber of Commerce and Industry (the tribunal): "The award of the tribunal shall enter into force on the date of making the award. The award of the tribunal shall be final and binding on the parties and is not subject to appeal. Parties are under an obligation to voluntarily execute the award of the tribunal."
Therefore, the award of the tribunal entered into force on June 30, 2014. This date shall be final and binding for execution by the Kyrgyz Republic. Should the Kyrgyz Republic not respond to the request for payment, the company will begin seeking redress through other avenues.
Background
On Oct. 30, 2013, Stans Energy and its subsidiaries filed a claim for arbitration under the Convention for the Protection of Investor's Rights, to which Kyrgyzstan is a signatory. The hearings were held in the Arbitration Court at the Moscow Chamber of Commerce and Industry. On June 30, 2014, the company was awarded the full amount of the claim plus certain damages and costs.
On July 1, 2014, a local Moscow arbitration court heard the application of the Kyrgyz Republic to not recognize the jurisdiction of the tribunal in the matter brought against it by Stans Energy. The court ruled that the tribunal did in fact have jurisdiction in the matter and dismissed the Kyrgyz claim in favour of Stans.
The Economic Court of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was requested by the Kyrgyz Republic to provide a ruling, on the interpretation of Article 11 of the Moscow Convention. The economic court has opted for an advisory opinion instead. As this is an advisory opinion only, it is not enforceable as a legal ruling even within the CIS. It is not binding on the tribunal or the courts outside the CIS. A hearing on this matter has been set for the end of September, 2014.
We seek Safe Harbor.