RE:RE:The weather forecast9lives,
you have quite the imagination! There is no one telling/paying me, or anyone else, to tell facts about the AMK/Cunninghsam rumper flumper! While clinging to this delusion you fail to show any conern for:
1) Cunninghsam does NOT have the $210 million needed for AMK! If they had 2% of that id be shocked...........time to buy a lotto tikcet!
2) AMK proudly announced Faskens was advising them. We found out from circular that now they are being advised by a one man lawyer shop who seems to do mostly housing litigation!
3) NGTG has been a flop! less than anemic volume!!!!!!! worst listing, volume wise, that I have ever seen but not something i watch closely. But 3k or 10k a day is just a waste of time imho!!!!!
Conclusion: THere is NO red flag big enough to save the sheeple!!!!! Aside from Cunninghsam still NOT having $210 million, no sheep have batted an eyelash at Faskens no longer advising AMK but rather Hirji Law Corporation is now on ithttps://www.hirji.ca/ Check out Hirji Law copr, apparently a 1 lawyer shophttps://www.hirji.ca/ : "I represent individuals and businesses involved in civil disputes. My goal is to give you clear options and effective legal representation" How many lawyers represented on their website?????? ONE! Salim Hirji!!!!!!!! WOW, SIMPLY WOW!! Recent cases? Some of my recent and notable cases include:
- Counsel for the landowner in an expropriation dispute with the District of North Vancouver: Hanlon v. North Vancouver (District), 2022 BCSC 353, affirmed on appeal: Hanlon v. North Vancouver (District), 2023 BCCA 114.
- Counsel for a restoration contractor in a dispute with the homeowner: Epic Restoration Services Inc. v. Fuller et al., 2023 BCSC 232; application for double costs allowed: 2023 BCSC 810.
- Counsel for a shareholder in a dispute with other shareholders over the ownership of a commercial property (2021).
- Counsel for a mining company in a private arbitration involving land rights and royalty payments (2020).
- Counsel for the homeowners in a dispute with the former owner involving environmental contamination: Ban v. Keleher, 2017 BCSC 1132
- Counsel for a shareholder in a dispute with the company over a share purchase contract (2018).
- Counsel for Sigma Engineering Ltd. in a dispute involving the ownership of water licence applications for independent power projects (IPPs): 2014 BCSC 144; appeal dismissed: 2015 BCCA 451. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada refused: 2016 SCC 36797. Further applications and appeals dismissed: 2016 BCSC 1422, 2017 BCCA 275, 2018 BCCA 69.
- Counsel for New Nadina Explorations Limited in a dispute involving surface rights: 2014 BCSC 2165; appeal dismissed: 2015 BCCA 243;
- Co-Counsel for a major Canadian retailer in a rent renewal / lease arbitration.
- Counsel for the purchaser of a home where the vendor threatened not to complete the sale.
- Counsel for the company in a dispute with a former director alleged to have stolen money and equipment.
- Counsel for a homeowner in a claim against a renovation contractor.
NineLives wrote: Larry, the fact you're back so soon after saying goodbye yesterday, then one can only assume your contract has been renewed until the new year. Which also means the party you represent is still interested in taking over Treaty Creek. Time really is ticking, suggest they put their bid on the table asap.
Afraid this will be my last message directed at you as I'll await your parties details revealing what they're willing to pay for TUD's, TUO's and AMK's interest. Please don't delay.