new article out "On the right to extract lithium covered by...

new article out "On the right to extract lithium covered by belongings derived from the Mining Code of 1932"

Here is a quote from the last couple paragraph.

In conclusion, the referral made by art. 5° DL 2886 to the repealed inc. 1st art. 3 CM 1932 must be understood as made in accordance with the transitory provisions of the LOCCM and CM 1983. These provisions establish, as relevant, that the holders of Assets of the Second Paragraph incorporate into them, among others, all the substances that had not been granted to them. , but that they were concesible at the moment of their constitution . Therefore, the Assets of the Second Paragraph that " have their measurement record registered, are in force, and whose manifestation, in turn, has been registered before January 1, 1979” incorporate the lithium located within their coverage. This solution is in full harmony with the principle of the LOCCM and the CM 1983 according to which each property (i) is unique with respect to the surface on which it falls (prohibition of overlapping) and (ii) enables its owner to exploit all the grantable substances located in its coverage (omni-comprehensive nature).

The eventual granting to the Codelco subsidiary of an exclusive CEOL for the exploitation of lithium in the Salar de Maricunga, consequently, would produce a collision of rights with the holders of mining rights derived from both the Assets of the First Subsection and the Second Subsection in that to Salt. Determining how that collision should be resolved is an urgent problem. In our vision, Private Law provides the best conceptual apparatus for it.