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

Stans Energy Corp V.HRE.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  HREEF

Stans Energy Corp. is a Canada-based resource development company focused on advancing rare and specialty metals properties and processing technologies. The Company is transitioning into a supplier of materials and technologies that will assist in satisfying the future energy supply, storage and transmission needs of the world. Its subsidiaries include SevAmRus CJSC, Kutisay Mining LLC and Kashka REE Plant Ltd.


TSXV:HRE.H - Post by User

Post by yeribeon Aug 21, 2019 9:38pm
249 Views
Post# 30053107

Additional Award?

Additional Award?The UNICTRAL Tribunal’s $24 million US award is indeed both extremely disappointing and a shock to us, Stans’ shareholders.

My guess is the Tribunals’ arbitrators only took into account Stans’ basic investment costs ,comprising  January 2011 investment cost to purchase (i)The 20 year license for the Kutessay II Ree mine ($ 6 US million), (ii) The costs to purchase title to the road to the mine, (iii)the rail head siding and gantry, (iv) The acquisition of the Kashla Ree Plant ( Completed May 26 2011) and (v) Refurbishing costs, such a reroofing the entire plant and plant modernization.

I question if the tribunals’ arbitrators fully took into account (i) Stans’ valuation, as prepared and reported by independent experts at Compass Lexecon.  This valuation report assessed the value of Stan’s investments in Kutessay II and Kalasay at US $128,300.00. Also claims interest, that to-date, (Feb 2016), amounted to US $91,030,000. Total investment: US $ 219,330,000.!!! Presumably Compass Lexecon’s evaluation also included investments  by Stans in Partnerships and the Kalasay 65 people workforce  Stans employed. Yes, based on a REE metal sample presented at an AGM, technically speaking Kalasay was up and running producing REE metals.prior to the expropriation of the mining licence.

 Russian Partnerships comprised:

VNIIHT-Russian Research Institute of Chemical Technology. Stans contracted VNIIHT to develop upscale REE extraction/processing technology. ( If I correctly recall the cost of this contract was very roughly around USD $ 3 to 6 million.)
  • IGPMGR
  • ARRIMR
  • GEOTEP
ADDITIONAL AWARD?

I think Stans may have a case to request the arbitral tribunal to make an addition award as to the claims presented in the arbitral proceedings. According to the UNICITRAL Arbitration Rules (As revised 2010); Stans within the next 30 days could request the arbitral tribunal to make an addition award. See the following extract from UNICITRAL Arbitration Rules (As revised 2010)
Additional award Article 39 1.
 Within 30 days after the receipt of the termination order or the award, a party, with notice to the other parties, may request the arbitral tribunal to make an award or an additional award as to claims presented in the arbitral proceedings but not decided by the arbitral tribunal. 2. If the arbitral tribunal considers the request for an award or additional award to be justified, it shall render or complete its award within 60 days after the receipt of the request. The arbitral tribunal may extend, if necessary, the period of time within which it shall make the award. 25 3. When such an award or additional award is made, the provisions of article 34, paragraphs 2 to 6, shall apply.

I would appreciate any thoughts / criticism concerning if Stans’ has a  case to  request for an Additional Award. UNICITRAL USD $24 Million  award does not make any sence,  given that previously the Moscow Commercial Arbitration Court awarded Stans USD $118,000,000. and the High Court of Justice England and Wales in the proceedings initiated by the Kyrgyz Republic to set aside the award on jurisdictional objections,  found in Stans favour and ordered the Republic to pay Stans USD $ 222,241.89.!!!

I’m holding firm at this time. I think the last chapter has yet to be written!!! We're yet to learn what Stans' investments in Kutessay II and Kalasay were either  disallowed or not decided during the Unicitral Tribunal Stans verses Kyrgyz arbitration proceedings and what will be Stans' response  ? 

Yeribe

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>