Share
752 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 237
clock Created with Sketch.
03/05/21
17:18
Share
Originally posted by jayneen:
↑
1) Litigation outcome does not threaten the Chinese current owners. The arbitration proceedings only have financial outcomes against the Congo government. 2) No. See1 above. The arbitration is about financial damages and does not injunct or affect project at all. I would note, however, that given the fact that the last ten years has seen zero progress on the ground it is highly likely the next ten years sees similar progress. 3) Yes and No. Congo will not give a toss about the litigation and will ignore it almost totally. The litigation will last much longer than the African politicians political (and probably actual) lifetime. However, if the litigation goes the whole way (highly unlikely) the outcome is binding through the World Bank. 4) Very little. There is almost no positive examples of this style of arbitration. As above Congo will not give a rat's derrier. Most likely outcome is that in 5 or 10 years time the lawyers agree to settle and the Congo government pay $20m of which the lawyers and litigation funders take $19.5m. This is now a side show.
Expand
An article on how FQML got back its costs in getting a tailings dam project up and running in the DRC that was later taken off it in a similar manner to SDL. The Congo here is different to he Congo is dealing in but the stories share some very close similarities. How do assets get taken off one day for a unknown company to then come up and claim new ownership ???.. How First Quantum recouped its seized mine (canadianbusiness.com)