Share
679 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 168
clock Created with Sketch. 20/11/17
20:43
Share
Originally posted by Mr.Hustler
↑
Here is my response from Angelique. Her response are in italic as it didn't copy as red. They are interesting. Thanks Angelique. The right to pre-empt depends on the nature of the sale if you are right and Cairn is selling 30% in the project then this looks likely to be subject of the partner’s rights to pre-empt. This depends on timing. At this point in time and until the arbitration findings, FAR would claim that Woodside has no right to pre-empt (however COP would have the right – whether this would be approved by the Government is another issue). The general principal around offering pre-emptive rights to JV partners is to allow the partners, who have invested in and remain in the project, to buy the stake offered for sale – it’s particularly important if the sale is undertaken at a low price. Hence, if Cairn was to sell down then FAR would need to consider the price of the deal as part of the acceptance or waiving of pre-emptive rights. As you point out, this depends on timing. I do not think that the ICC court will allow the “roll back” as you describe – remember that FAR has not elected to pre-empt the COP sale and may not even if we are given the right (we have not seen all of the terms and conditions of the sale). You pose an interesting question for the lawyers. However, please bear in mind that we have not been notified of a sale or the intention of Cairn to sell any share of their position. Cairn is also not a stressed seller and we certainly hope this means if they do sell then it will be for a healthy price. Again, this is a hypothetical question for the lawyers .
Expand
Thanks for your effort, and sharing it, Mr. H.
(20min delay)