I was checking out the Sundance Resources case to get a sense of how things might look for AVZ SH's if we can't find a solution prior to delisting.
Some on this forum are suggesting that AVZ might consider relisting and letting the market figure out its value. I'm no expert in ASX listing rules, no-doubt there will be posters here that can verify if the Chapter 12 rule in the example below may apply to AVZ.
Sundance Resources had its mining permit cancelled by the Republic of Congo, which is obviously not the DRC but what caught my eye was how the ASX responded and why Sundance was delisted.
In the announcement below, you can see that Sundance Resources was delisted because of Chapter 12 (On-Going Requirements). The crux of the matter was that they no longer had a mining permit for their Congo operations because it was cancelled by the local authorities (as per AVZ). It makes you think about the consequences of losing a mining permit and how the ASX deals with it under their "On-Going Requirements" rule. If this same rule is applied to AVZ Nigel may not have the option to relist unless they secure a ML.
12 January 2021
SHAREHOLDER UPDATE ON DELISTING
Sundance Resources Limited (“Sundance” or “the Company”) advised on 7 December 2020 that ASX had
extended the date Sundance would be delisted to 8 March 2021in the event Sundance was not able to
demonstrate compliance with Chapter 12 of the Listing Rules (“On-Going Requirements”). Key to
Sundance being able to meet the ASX requirements was for Sundance’s subsidiary Congo Iron SA (“Congo
Iron”) to have a mining permit over the Nabeba iron ore project in the Republic of Congo (“Congo”).
With the loss of the mining permit in Congo, as announced on 16 December 2020 and later updated on
21 December 2020, Sundance did not have any prospects of being able to satisfy the ASX requirements.
For anyone who might be interested, you can find the full announcement linked below. It's relatively short, just two pages, and it covers what happens to your shares if we're unfortunate enough to get delisted, it also offers insights into the future of Sundance Resources r(maybe a glimpse at our destiny if AVZ ends up in this situation, let's hope not).
https://www.sundanceresources.com.au/irm/PDF/6f6a7769-bc85-49dd-ba80-5f20ed85d758/MarketUpdateto%20ShareholdersThe exerts below are from a Sundance Resources update to their shareholders 15 Months after the above announcement.
15 April 2023
UPDATE ON LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST CONGO, CAMEROON AND AUSTSINO
Summary:
•
Memorial of Claim have been filed at the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) inrespect to Sundance’s proceeding against the Republic of Congo. Document review isongoing with the first hearing scheduled for Q1 2024.• The Republic of Cameroon has ignored the interim order by the Emergency Arbitrator at
the ICC and instead granted exploitation rights over Mbalam to a third party, resulting ina Memorial of Claim being issued against Cameroon. Legal battles can be painfully slow, and as evident with Sundance Resources, even when they secure an order from the Emergency Arbitrator in their favour, Cameroon simply dismisses that order and proceeds to grant exploration rights to a third party, almost as if it never happened.
Heading down the delisting and legal battle road, similar to what happened with Sundance Resources, sounds like a real nightmare for SH's. As it stands right now though we have nothing to sell, and even if AVZ are right from a legal stand point, based on others experience it looks like being a long, frustrating journey that may still prove fruitless if the DRC ignores orders by international arbitrators.
imo - We should make every effort to strike an agreement, even if it's only for the Roche Dure pegmatite, which is undeniably valuable. If we can negotiate some sort of arrangement for RD, Nigel and the board can then decide on the best course of action, whether it's proceeding with mining or selling the asset and getting the hell out of there.
