Dear investors, dear Dom74.First of all I would like to thank...

Dear investors, dear Dom74.
First of all I would like to thank the AVZ team for the report, which wonderfully shows the legal situation of the parties involved.
@ Dom74 your statement is unfortunately also wrong! I want to explain why.
One has to be absolutely correct/abstract about law and order to understand the situation correctly.

let's get started:

1. AVZ vs. Dathomir
AVZ currently owns 75%!
Why?
60% are safe because Cominiere and Dathomir have waived any rights in the joint venture agreement and at the same time are participants in the same joint venture. This is not contestable!
15% bought AVZ from Dathomir and are legally transferred. AVZ owns the shares! Dathomir revoked this in writing to AVZ without going to court.
AVZ has gone on the offensive and has applied to the ICC for legal confirmation so that this can no longer be contested in the future.
Nevertheless, AVZ is the legal owner of this 15%. Also until 09.2024!
It is very unlikely that Dathomir will get the 15% back. Why? With what reason? It's just a stalling tactic and they want more money.
This can run alongside further development and would not interfere, since AVZ owns it.

2. Cominière vs. Zijin Mining / Jin Cheng
I have to quote the text from the report exactly!
"Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, AVZ has at all material times held a right of first refusal over 15% of shares in Dathcom (noting that Cominière holds a 25% interest in Dathcom to which this right of first refusal applies and Cominière must cede 10% out of its 25% interest to the DRC Government as a condition of the award of the Mining Licence for the Manono Project).On 10 September 2021, Cominière purported to conclude a Share Transfer Agreement with Jin Cheng for 15% of the shares in Dathcom. This purported sale and transfer breached AVZ’s right of first refusal, is null and void under DRC law and has not been recognised by Dathcom.Jin Cheng filed an International Chamber of Commerce arbitration claim in Paris in May 2022 against AVZ citing “an abuse of majority” and based on the arbitration clause provided in Dathcom’s Articles of Association is seeking to be recognised as a minority shareholder of Dathcom.AVZ is seeking the dismissal of Jin Cheng’s claims by the ICC’s sole arbitrator as Jin Cheng does not have the capacity to rely on the arbitration clause agreement provided by Dathcom’s Articles of Association, to which Jin Cheng is not a party.AVZ successfully obtained the bifurcation of the arbitration so the arbitrator will rule first on AVZ’s challenge of Jin Cheng’s capacity to rely on the arbitration agreement.AVZ considers it has a strong legal standing in these matters and prospects of success."

AVZ successfully split the proceedings before the ICC into two consecutive proceedings!
1. Court decision:
Can Jin Cheng even file a majority abuse lawsuit under a joint venture agreement in which they are not a party?
The arbitration clause in Dathcom's Articles of Association applies only to the parties to the joint venture agreement. This is AVZ and Cominiere! Externals have no right to it!If the rejection of the ICC is successful, there is no second procedure.
2.Court decision:
If Jin Cheng is not terminated, there will be procedure 2, which will determine whether the sale of Cominiere's 15% to Jin Cheng is legal and, more importantly, complete.

That is the correct legal situation that we have.
The mining license will be granted if the majority of shareholders and the ability to finance it are secured and DRC gets 10% from Cominiere.
This is the case. For this reason, the mining license must be considered separately.

Greetings from Germany
Combaste