Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

MountainWest Resources Inc. C.MWR



CSE:MWR - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Post by eyeNteeon Jan 19, 2015 5:26pm
105 Views
Post# 23336857

News out

News out
 
Mountainstar awaits final ruling re Chilean concessions 

2015-01-19 16:03 ET - News Release 


Mr. Brent Johnson reports 

On Jan. 14, 2015, at the Supreme Court of Chile in Santiago, Role No. 23. 178-14, Mountainstar Gold Inc. delivered final verbal arguments to the justices. The process is to strike out the Amarillos 1 al 3,000 concessions of salts and nitrates. These concessions were acquired by Barrick Gold Corp. when it took over Lac Minerals in 1994. This area became the main area of the Mina Pascua prospectus. 

Under Chilean law, Sernageomin does not allow the mining of gold/silver/copper from concessions of salts and nitrates. In this action, there were many contradictions by Minera Nevada SpA (Barrick Chile). The main one being that Gonzalo Nieto Valdez, Barrick's lawyer, argued that Jorge Lopehandia's concessions were a distance away from the orebody. He was immediately corrected and reminded of his testimony under oath earlier in another court. He had sworn "the Amarillos Sur areas were the area of greatest geological interest to the Pascua Lama project." This was in case No. C1912-2001. 

The second serious contradiction to the judges presented by Mr. Valdez had to do with its engineer Hector Unda Llanos. In one court he swore that Minera Nevada did not know Mr. Llanos from 2001 to 2015. In another court he swore that the company was Mr. Llanos's employer from 1996 to 2015. 

On Jan. 14, 2015, a decision was rendered by the five Supreme Court justices. It will be delivered to the plaintiff and the defendant as these honourable judges find appropriate. The company will report in a timely fashion as to their decision. 
 
Mountainstar awaits final ruling re Chilean concessions 

2015-01-19 16:03 ET - News Release 


 


 
Bullboard Posts