RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Kyrgyz Appeal- Interesting, and Disturbing Article
Paleface, you sound like you know nothing. I have not said that the KR courts are going to decide anything. It is the Moscow courts in Russia that are hearing the appeal of the arbitration award. It is comments like yours that I feel need to be responded to because they are not based upon any understanding of what is going on. I suggest you read my posts on the legal issues since the September 25 decision from the CIS courts, and then state how you disagree with my analysis. I have cited my authority for all my statements (the CIS treaty, UNICITRAL, the CIS decision, the arbitration decision, Canadian injunction decisions, etc.). I have read it all including the prior Sistem Canadian case decisions, and the prior Centerra/Kryg arbitration documents. I cannot give an unqualified opinion because not being involved in the case and not being legal counsel for the company and privy to all attorney client communications I cannot know everything there is to know. I also cannot give any certain opinion on what is going to happen any more than Stans lawyers can or would do - courts can see things differently than the lawyers and can even make stupid mistakes. There are no guarantees one way or the other until the fat lady has sung. But everything I have read indicates to me that Stans is on thin ice. To date I have heard nothing that has made me question my analysis. The statements David has made, albeit as reported secondhand on this board, that imply that nothing the Russian courts decide at this point will have any effect on the Canadian proceedings is I believe wrong as I have explained. I provided the link to the applicable Canadian law - read it and see if you disagree with me. His claim that they were relying on UNICITRAL as the basis for jurisdiction is likewise troubling as they did not select a arbitrator under that process. Read the link I provided, and also check out how Centerra proceeded to select an arbitrator under UNICITRAL against the Kyrgs - an entirely different process than Stans used. I have tried to be kind in my characterization of Stans management, giving them the benefit of the doubt, in my posts particularly with the lack of disclosure about the litigation. Perhaos I shouldn't give a hoot about anyone buying up 100,000s of share because they think the payment of the $118 million is a lock, and they are going to make 7 times their money when it is split up $0.66 a share. Maybe they will be right, maybe that is a good investment if you have the risk capital. If you read most people on this board, they think it is almost a certainty to happen. If someone has the money to spare, then they can take that gamble, but they need to understand the share price is where it is at for a reason.