Magrah
04 Jan 2017
Re: When is it going to open? My apologies just noticed the latest RNS.---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----The Company expects to be able to finalize its position in regard to seeking revision and / or annulment of this Award by 31 January 2017. As part of any application to revise and / or annul this Award, Churchill would also seek a provisional stay of the costs orders that have been made. The suspension in trading of the Company's shares on AIM will continue to remain in place pending clarification of the Company's financial position which can only be assessed in light of the Directors' decision on the filing of a revision and / or annulment application and the subsequent position on the USD 9.4m costs order. Churchill Chairman David Quinlivan said "we remain troubled by many aspects of this Award." This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Market Abuse Regulation 596/2014. ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------That means trading will resume hopefully end of January 2017 . . .
NeroHadsi
03 Jan 2017
Re: When is it going to open? Presumably CHL will just open... they have no reason or anything compelling them to notify us beforehand?
Magrah
03 Jan 2017
Re: When is it going to open? This board has gone awfully quiet!I'd imagine that the lawyers are looking at the possibility of an appeal / on what grounds, whether it is worth appealing from a further cost perspective, the $9m and the impact of the company generally. It won’t open until all the above is decided and there is a clear path forward whatever that may be. The Christmas break has of course not helped. As to when the stock will be removed from suspension that’s anyone’s guess but I’d say next week as a punt.
NeroHadsi
21 Dec 2016
When is it going to open? What are they waiting for?
Gold or Silver
07 Dec 2016
Re: Oxus all over again It`s a huge disappointment and not entirely unexpected.One only gets our side of the case of course .Therein lies a conundrum .Seems the Arbiters spotted something that Our side did not .Thirty four inappropriate licences seems a huge lack of clarification from Our side .Commiserations to all whom lost on this case .The good news We live to fight another day .Albeit somewhat poorer .And May
Magrah
07 Dec 2016
Drat Well I may have sold a fifth but my average is 51p. So what now? The company did have an abundance of cash but no doubt a large part has wittered away. Any prediction on opening once the suspension is lifted? I reckon mid single figures (only speculation so don’t shoot me down as someone who thinks he’s in the know), ah well it's only a paper loss; see you in another 5 years time!!!
nigel2222
07 Dec 2016
Re: Oxus all over again Those who made the decision listened to all of the evidence. It's a bit rich to make such comments about judges and barristers generally when we didn't hear any of the arguments in the court. We were hopeful of course but no doubt so was the Republic of Indonesia and their side won the argument. It was always a gamble and we lost. The rest is just sour grapes. I assume that anyone who felt that strongly wouldn't have been a shareholder so has lost nothing.
BBanker
07 Dec 2016
Re: Oxus all over again I tried to express my views concerning the Legal Profession but i must have used an unacceptable word as it was rejected. In all my experience with the Legal process it seems clear that those involved have a very high opinion of themselves and are increasingly out of touch. One only has to listen to the discussions concerning Brexit to understand that most judges and barristers do not live in the real world and justice is on the side of the establishment and has little to do with what is fair and reasonable. It seems to me that a decision is often based on interpretation rather than making the right decision. In the cases of both Oxus and Churchill the decisions n makers have pandered to corrupt regimes.
indaknow
07 Dec 2016
GPback where art thou Funny how the uber ramper is so quiet.... Having told everyone why this was a guaranteed win I'd have thought he might show some contrition and apologise for his unwarranted ramping.People might think I'm being unfair picking on GBpack, but he has a record of ramping without foundation and is dangerous to the uneducated who don't know that AIM is a casino staked in favour of the bank.
The Saint always
07 Dec 2016
Re: Oxus all over again From L1onheart on LSE:'I was in Oxus too and, as people here are rightly saying, it was too big. This time I traded around the peaks and dips and had just 10k in the end but they were 'free' after trading gains. Several times I thought about getting more but kept thinking of my crappy Christmas Eve last year when Oxus lost and held back thank goodness. I really feel for all those who have lost on this, big or small, I don't think it's fair to call PI's 'stupid' to be in this as a win would have been a massive multibag and that's what we're in AIM for - high risk, high reward but loads of fails on the way.Easier said than done but, from bitter experience, please try and put it behind you so that you can enjoy Christmas with your families. I couldn't get the Oxus decision out of my head last year and ruined it for my family - please try not to do the same. No matter how bad the pain, it's not their fault, it's not your fault, it's crooked business around the world. GLA'
GENG
07 Dec 2016
Re: Oxus all over again Well it was always a binary bet! Wish I hadn't bought that extra chunk on Monday - would have been unscathed otherwise.Strange thing is the decision is almost a contradiction. Conclusion: These big law firms need to pay bigger bungs than the people they are fighting!
indaknow
07 Dec 2016
Oxus all over again No real surprise that the Arbitration panel appears to have ignored what would appear clear evidence in favour of CHL. These panels seem to continually throw up perverse results. Makes you wonder what the purpose of the BIT is. GPback - you're awfully quiet.... Can't think why....
Pappiklon
07 Dec 2016
Re: RNS -Churchills claims dismissed CHURCHILL MINING PLC("Churchill" or "the Company"
CHURCHILL'S CLAIM AGAINST INDONESIA STRUCK OUT The Directors of Churchill Mining plc (AIM:CHL) advise that earlier today the ICSID Tribunal ("Tribunal" granted Indonesia's application to dismiss the Churchill claims for damages arising out of the revocation of the mining licenses that made up the East Kutai Coal Project in East Kalimantan ("EKCP" Indonesia. The Tribunal's decision has included the following findings:- (1) Thirty four (34) disputed documents were held to be not authentic;(2) The forger of the disputed documents was most likely a person or persons acting for or on behalf of Churchill's Indonesian partner the Ridlatama group in collusion with a person inside the East Kutai Regency;(3) There was no finding that Churchill or its officers were involved in any forgery;(4) Churchill's due diligence investigations conducted at the time of acquiring the East Kutai Coal licenses were insufficient;(5) The claims brought by Churchill in this arbitration are dismissed; and(6) Churchill is ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees. Churchill Chairman David Quinlivan said "We are obviously extremely disappointed by the Tribunal's decision and the fact that the Tribunal drew no adverse inferences against Indonesia following the refusal by Mr Isran Noor to attend the August 2015 hearing so that he could be cross-examined and the refusals by Indonesia to provide documents that the Tribunal itself considered prima facie relevant. While we are still reviewing the reasons, the Tribunal appears to have accepted that Mr Noor was deceived into signing the exploitation licenses despite his non-appearance and his witness statement having been struck from the record. Indonesia has always conceded that the EKCP exploitation licenses were validly issued and signed and it is difficult to understand how the Tribunal found otherwise on the evidence available."The ICSID process allows Churchill to request annulment of the award by an application in writing addressed to the Secretary-General on the following grounds
i) that the Tribunal was not properly constituted;(ii) that the Tribunal has manifestly exceeded its powers;(iii) that there has been a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure; or(iv) that the award has failed to state the reasons on which it is based.Churchill believes there are grounds to annul this award and is working with its lawyers Clifford Chance LLP to determine which of the above grounds may be available. As part of that application, Churchill would seek a stay of the costs orders that have been made. As referred to above, Churchill has been ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees and accordingly the suspension in trading of the Company's shares on AIM will remain in place pending clarification of the Company's financial position A full copy of the Tribunal decision on Indonesia's forgery dismissal application will be available on the Company's website www.churchillmining.com and the website of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes at [link] (under cases for "Churchill". This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Market Abuse Regulation 596/2014. ENDS
Pappiklon
07 Dec 2016
Re: RNS -Churchills claims dismissed CHURCHILL MINING PLC("Churchill" or "the Company" CHURCHILL'S CLAIM AGAINST INDONESIA STRUCK OUT The Directors of Churchill Mining plc (AIM:CHL) advise that earlier today the ICSID Tribunal ("Tribunal" granted Indonesia's application to dismiss the Churchill claims for damages arising out of the revocation of the mining licenses that made up the East Kutai Coal Project in East Kalimantan ("EKCP" Indonesia. The Tribunal's decision has included the following findings:- (1) Thirty four (34) disputed documents were held to be not authentic;(2) The forger of the disputed documents was most likely a person or persons acting for or on behalf of Churchill's Indonesian partner the Ridlatama group in collusion with a person inside the East Kutai Regency;(3) There was no finding that Churchill or its officers were involved in any forgery;(4) Churchill's due diligence investigations conducted at the time of acquiring the East Kutai Coal licenses were insufficient;(5) The claims brought by Churchill in this arbitration are dismissed; and(6) Churchill is ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees. Churchill Chairman David Quinlivan said "We are obviously extremely disappointed by the Tribunal's decision and the fact that the Tribunal drew no adverse inferences against Indonesia following the refusal by Mr Isran Noor to attend the August 2015 hearing so that he could be cross-examined and the refusals by Indonesia to provide documents that the Tribunal itself considered prima facie relevant. While we are still reviewing the reasons, the Tribunal appears to have accepted that Mr Noor was deceived into signing the exploitation licenses despite his non-appearance and his witness statement having been struck from the record. Indonesia has always conceded that the EKCP exploitation licenses were validly issued and signed and it is difficult to understand how the Tribunal found otherwise on the evidence available."The ICSID process allows Churchill to request annulment of the award by an application in writing addressed to the Secretary-General on the following groundsi) that the Tribunal was not properly constituted;(ii) that the Tribunal has manifestly exceeded its powers;(iii) that there has been a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure; or(iv) that the award has failed to state the reasons on which it is based.Churchill believes there are grounds to annul this award and is working with its lawyers Clifford Chance LLP to determine which of the above grounds may be available. As part of that application, Churchill would seek a stay of the costs orders that have been made. As referred to above, Churchill has been ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees and accordingly the suspension in trading of the Company's shares on AIM will remain in place pending clarification of the Company's financial position A full copy of the Tribunal decision on Indonesia's forgery dismissal application will be available on the Company's website www.churchillmining.com and the website of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes at [link] (under cases for "Churchill". This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Market Abuse Regulation 596/2014. ENDS
Pappiklon
07 Dec 2016
Re: RNS -Churchills claims dismissed CHURCHILL MINING PLC("Churchill" or "the Company" CHURCHILL'S CLAIM AGAINST INDONESIA STRUCK OUT The Directors of Churchill Mining plc (AIM:CHL) advise that earlier today the ICSID Tribunal ("Tribunal" granted Indonesia's application to dismiss the Churchill claims for damages arising out of the revocation of the mining licenses that made up the East Kutai Coal Project in East Kalimantan ("EKCP" Indonesia. The Tribunal's decision has included the following findings:- (1) Thirty four (34) disputed documents were held to be not authentic;(2) The forger of the disputed documents was most likely a person or persons acting for or on behalf of Churchill's Indonesian partner the Ridlatama group in collusion with a person inside the East Kutai Regency;(3) There was no finding that Churchill or its officers were involved in any forgery;(4) Churchill's due diligence investigations conducted at the time of acquiring the East Kutai Coal licenses were insufficient;(5) The claims brought by Churchill in this arbitration are dismissed; and(6) Churchill is ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees. Churchill Chairman David Quinlivan said "We are obviously extremely disappointed by the Tribunal's decision and the fact that the Tribunal drew no adverse inferences against Indonesia following the refusal by Mr Isran Noor to attend the August 2015 hearing so that he could be cross-examined and the refusals by Indonesia to provide documents that the Tribunal itself considered prima facie relevant. While we are still reviewing the reasons, the Tribunal appears to have accepted that Mr Noor was deceived into signing the exploitation licenses despite his non-appearance and his witness statement having been struck from the record. Indonesia has always conceded that the EKCP exploitation licenses were validly issued and signed and it is difficult to understand how the Tribunal found otherwise on the evidence available."The ICSID process allows Churchill to request annulment of the award by an application in writing addressed to the Secretary-General on the following groundsi) that the Tribunal was not properly constituted;(ii) that the Tribunal has manifestly exceeded its powers;(iii) that there has been a serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure; or(iv) that the award has failed to state the reasons on which it is based.Churchill believes there are grounds to annul this award and is working with its lawyers Clifford Chance LLP to determine which of the above grounds may be available. As part of that application, Churchill would seek a stay of the costs orders that have been made. As referred to above, Churchill has been ordered to pay a total of USD 9,446,528 in costs and arbitration tribunal fees and accordingly the suspension in trading of the Company's shares on AIM will remain in place pending clarification of the Company's financial position A full copy of the Tribunal decision on Indonesia's forgery dismissal application will be available on the Company's website www.churchillmining.com and the website of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes at [link] (under cases for "Churchill". This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Market Abuse Regulation 596/2014. ENDS
