RE:9 concessions published as freely claimable by IngemmetAfter the last news about the 9 claims, I have been diving into the Public Registries to check if Ingemmet has indeed been able to register the Expiration Resolution (1) for the 15 concessions (without Medida Cautelar) in the Public Registries, considering that, because of the State of Emergency, things are taking longer than usual in any public entity.
I can confirm that, despite having started the process in 2019, until now Ingemmet has not been able to register the expiration of the 15 concessions in the Public Registries. The question arise then, why is it taking so long for them to register the Expiration Resolution? Well, it seems that Macusani's attorneys have been able to extend the expiration process for an abnormally long period of time. Let's take a brief look to the expiration process of these 15 concessions since the Mining Council conffirmed Ingemmet's Expiration Resolution:
July, 2019. The Mining Council conffirmed Ingemmet's Resolution (2) declaring the expiration of 32 of Macusani Yellowcake's concessions. After this decision, Macusani's attorneys made several requests to the Mining Council presenting additional arguments to ask for a self reverse of the Council's decision.
October, 2019. After the Mining Council rejected (without further discussion) Macusani's requests to self reverse their decision, Macusani's attorneys hurried to present the demand before the Judiciary, which was admitted on October 15th, 2019 (3).
10/22/2019. The Mining Council returned the files of the 32 concessions to Ingemmet (4) for the expiration process to continue.
11/05/2019. After receiving the file, Ingemmet declared the expiration of the 32 concessions as executed (
ejecutoriada) (5).
11/10/2019. Macusani's attorneys request the "annotation" of the judicial demand in the registries corresponding to the 15 mining concessions. What is such annotation? Is a way to make sure that, in the event that somebody else takes the concession (or part of it), that will be reverted when Macusani wins the trial, that is, Macusani will own the concession again. Looking at the Public Registries, any interested party that started the applicacation process would be aware that the concession is not "fully" available.
December, 2019. When annotating the judicial demand, a Public Registrator observed the request, because a Medida Cautelar has not been issued for the 15 claims, which is a required condition for the demand to be annotated.
12/31/2019. Ingemmet formally requested the registration of the 15 concessions' expiration in the Public Registries.
01/16/2020. A Public Registrator admitted Ingemmet's request but suspended it (6) until the registration of the judicial demand (requested by Macusani) was definitely accepted or denied.
01/29/2020. Macusani's attorneys appealed (7) the observation made by the Public Registrator to their request (annotation of demand) and, consequently, the file was raised to the Registry Court (Tribunal Registral), which is the last and definitive instance.
07/17/2020. As expected, the Registry Court decided to dismiss Macusani's appeal (8) and definitely rejected the annotation of the demand (9), as the Medida Cautelar had not been issued for the 15 concessions. The process took a longer than usual time because of the pandemic.
As you can see, instead of being able to register the expiration shortly after the Resolution was declared executed (November 2019), Ingemmet has not been able to register it until today! But, given that the Public Registries have already dismissed Macusani's appeal, I expect that the suspension will be lifted shortly and so the registration should be finished this month or the next one (November) for the 15 concessions without Medida Cautelar.
Now, why has Ingemmet published 9 concessions as freely claimable if their expiration has bnot been adequately registered? Well, I have checked the other concessions (not owned by Macusani) that were declared freely claimable at the same time, and have found the same: their expiration have not been registered. It seems that, despite being illegal, Ingemmet has been doing this since long time ago, as a way to "speed up" things. Why haven't there been any problem until now? Because when somebody stops paying the validity rights and let his concessions expire is because he's not interested in them anymore. Without appeals, the registration of the expiration takes no more than one month, so if there is somebody else interested in the concession, the expiration is certainly already registered when the application process ends.
What has Macusani Yellowcake done? The same day of the publication, on September 30th, Macusani send a request to Ingemmet (10) asking for the 15 concessions to be excluded from the publication. If they're excluded and the expiration is registered in November (as I expect), then the 15 concessions would be published as freely claimable only on December 30th, and PLU would have earned some more time... again. Will that succeed? Well, after following the concessions issue for more than a year, I'm skeptical, but who knows...
(1)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fniibi-resolucion_caducidad_20_02_2019.pdf (2)
https://stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard?symbol=v.plu&postid=29981451 (3)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnuomu-Auto_admisorio_demanda_10760.pdf (4)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnjq7j-CM_retorna_expediente.pdf (5)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnjqap-declaracion_ejecutoriada.pdf (6)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnuna6-Esquela_suspension_03153022.pdf (7)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnunr2-apelacion_anotaci%C3%B3n_demanda_ocacasa_4.pdf (8)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnund3-Resolucion_TR_tacha_02705250.pdf (9)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnunbm-Esquela_tacha_02705250.pdf (10)
https://cdn.ceo.ca/1fnih3u-solictud_exclusion_ocacasa_4.pdf