RE: RE: Next NAV calculation?
I read the agreement carefully myself (I'm a first year law student) and also showed it to several lawyers I know.
There is no mention of the principal in the conversion section.
In American contract law, ambiguities will be interpreted AGAINST the drafter of the agreement (which I suspect was Aberdeen, as lendor). It may be different in South African law, but I doubt it. Also bear in mind, you've got a Canadian company suing a South African company in South Africa. Unless Aberdeen can show that during negotiations the principal was discussed even if conversion were elected.... even still, if this was intended, why was it not included in the drafting? Unless Simmer's was the drafter and it was their omission, Aberdeen has no chance...
Even still, without the principal, Aberdeen still received a MAJOR return on their initial investment just based on the royalty (I believe it was 4x or so).
You think the South African court is going to be sympathetic to Aberdeen? That they are going to award them the principal too!!??!?!??
FAT CHANCE.