I have just got some info about the appeal. It appears that this appeal is far from routine as the ruling that granted American Lithium ownership over the disputed concessions contradicts several core principals of the Peruvian Code governing mineral claims. Peru's legal system is based on Napoleonic civil code, not the common law used in North America because of this rulings happen that seem counterintuitive but are in fact exactly in line with the civil code. The ruling by the lower court appeals to "fairness" not the letter of the law. Unfortunately under a civil code ruling this is flawed from a
legal perspective. It is very likely that the lower courts decision will be overturned and the disputed claims are returned to the government.
Where the OSC comes in here is that, the company should have been aware of these facts and in fact reported that the appeal was routine. This is reminiscent of the whitewashing that was going on when the first OSC complaint was filed.
I am also now very concerned that it is apparent that more of the resource is contained in the disputed claims than was reported in the Amendeded and Restated 43-101 on this project. This renderes the Amemded and Restated 43-101 invalid and a new 43-101 will have to be published by the company.
This restatement has implications at the OSC as well.
All this brought you us by the new team
melbers. I am angry about significant money that can't move out of the stock because of the hold placed on the stock when purchased through the last financing round. Sure is buyer beware. But buyers need the company to be honest about their situations so that investors can make informed choices.
When I look at the press releases on the rulings regarding the ownership of the claims I see a drafting that is walking the razor blade of disclosure and I am not happy about the money that is stuck!