we won, page-9

That would be my pleasure Donk !!
$N 480 Bn = $A 480/6(approx) = $A 80 Bn.
That's BILLION Donk (lol).
See the article below.
Have a great day all ...I can smell the roses and hear the birds twittering already .
Regards
Q





Catherine Sasman
8 July 2010

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Email|Print|Comment
Share:
Windhoek ? A High Court decision to declare contracts between Metals Australia and Metals Namibia, and Metals Australia and Malakia Amakutuwa, null and void is being contested in the Supreme Court.

According to the heads of argument lodged by the appellants' legal representative Jeremy Gauntlett, Amakutuwa signed an agreement with the appellants in terms of which two exclusive prospecting licenses were to be transferred to Metals Namibia.

The parties agreed the transfer of the Exclusive Prospecting Licences (EPLs) would be through a close corporation, Reliance Investments CC (RIA), a company claimed never to have existed.

Nonetheless, said the appellants, Amakutuwa continued to seek the transfer of the EPLs, and on February 5, 2006, he successfully applied to the Mining Commissioner to transfer the EPLs not via RIA, but directly from himself to New Mining Company - a predecessor of Metals Namibia.

In the course of the transfer, Metals Namibia reportedly realised that Amakutuwa did not tell the truth about the financial viability of the EPLs.

The appellants' legal representative argued that Amakutuwa thus "swindled" its clients.

The appellants thus sought restitution by tendering to transfer back the EPLs to Amakutuwa, who refused to take them back "against the most basic reimbursement" of the appellants "reasonable expenses".

The appellants then entered into a "release agreement" with Amakutuwa on February 2, 2007, in terms of which they waived every claim they had.

The parties agreed that New Mining Company would retain the EPLs.

According to the appellants, on February 13, 2009 Amakutuwa wanted the agreements impugned.

This he did by launching an urgent application with the High Court to declare the agreements null and void.

"He adopted the extraordinary stance that because RIA did not exist, as he himself had persistently represented and guaranteed it had, he was entitled to a declaration of invalidity," held the appellants.

Thus, he argued that because RIA did not exist, as he had formerly claimed it had, the contracts thus "collapsed" between the parties.

His urgent application culminated in the judgment now under appeal.

The appellants' lawyers maintained that the High Court erroneously granted Amakutuwa's application.

In an application to bring further evidence to the Supreme Court, Amakutuwa's defence claims that the appellants misguidedly claimed that the EPLs are of little value.

They requested that the court consider further evidence pertaining to the purported value of the EPLs.

They alleged that Alexander Clemen, a director of both appellants, had estimated the "total in-ground value of the contained uranium" currently explored to a depth of 100 metres at the EPL 3308 at Mile 72 in the Erongo Region, at N$22.1 billion.

If the depth were to go to 300 metres, it was reportedly estimated that the potential value could treble to an estimated N$480 billion.

Relevant Links
Southern Africa
Namibia
Mining
Legal Affairs
Asia, Australia, and Africa
Company
Business
Hence, argued Amakutuwa, the appellants disingenuously stated that the EPLs were of "little, if any, value".

The appellants' lawyers argued that this further evidence was filed "unjustifiably late", and that it should therefore not be considered.

"The new facts are not remotely relevant to the central issue on which Malakia [Amakutuwa] succeeded in the High Court: the finding that he was entitled to have the initial agreement and the release agreement declared invalid by virtue of the incapacity of one of the parties to it, namely, the close corporation RIA, which was supposed to be the conduit for the transfer of rights from Malakia to the appellants, and related contentious nullity," argued Clemen in an opposing affidavit.

Presiding over the matter was Judge Gerrit Maritz, assisted by Acting Supreme Court Judge Fred Chomba from Zambia, and Judge Kate O'Regan from the South African Constitutional Court.