16.2 C
Belgrade

Canadian Gold Pool at International Arbitration Tribunal – Kazakhstan wins the lawsuit

After nearly 20 years from the termination of the contract, in 2016, Gold Pool initiated a United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) arbitration proceedings against Kazakhstan based on the Canadian-Soviet bilateral investment treaty. The treaty was signed two years before Kazakhstan claimed its independence – allegedly making it the legal successor to the treaty. The Kazakh Ministry of Justice press service reported that on July 30 the International Arbitration Tribunal issued a unanimous decision on the immunity and dismissal of the case initiated in 2016 by Gold Pool, a Canadian junior mining company, against Kazakhstan.

The plaintiff claimed $917 million regarding the agreement on trust management of the Kazakhaltyn national gold mining and processing enterprise.

“The Gold Pool lawsuit is another attempt by so-called ‘investors’ to make money on arbitration, based on doubtful facts. The decision of the arbitration tribunal is a confirmation that Kazakhstan is forming a modern legal system that is capable of withstanding such hostile corporate actions,” said Kazakh Minister of Justice Marat Beketayev.

According to the statement, Gold Pool received management of Kazakhaltyn in March 1996 to pay off the company’s debts, restore and modernize production, create a favorable financial environment and an effective market strategy. The Canadian company, however, failed to follow its contractual obligations.

Kazakhstan terminated the contract in August 1997 after repeated systematic violations. Gold Pool responded with a lawsuit against the Kazakh government in international commercial arbitration under a management agreement. The case did not take any procedural steps and expired in 2000.

The Kazakh side strengthened its position on the absence of any obligations under the treaty after a scrupulous analysis of interstate agreements archival documents, among other documents. One of the key contributing papers was the legislative framework of the 1990s, which had undergone significant changes at the time of the filing of the arbitration claim.

The tribunal ordered the plaintiff to reimburse Kazakhstan for all the costs incurred in the arbitration process.

The Kazakh Ministry of Justice and Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle international law firm represented Kazakhstan’s interests in this case.

Source: astanatimes.com

 

 

 

Related News

AMMC targets major production milestones by 2030 with ongoing development projects

Almalyk Mining and Metallurgical Combine (AMMC) has set ambitious production goals for 2030, aiming to achieve annual output of 500,000 tons of copper, 50...

Kazatomprom partners with Jordan uranium mining company on joint uranium exploration and extraction

Kazatomprom, Kazakhstan's national atomic company, has entered into a collaboration with Jordan Uranium Mining Company (JUMCO) to jointly explore and extract uranium in Jordan....

Grit Metals reports positive gold exploration results from Finland

Grit Metals Corp. has announced the results from its inaugural reconnaissance gold exploration campaign in the Central Lapland Greenstone Belt (CLGB) of Northern Finland,...

Sanctions cause cost surge for Russia’s Polyus gold project

Russia's largest gold producer, Polyus, announced that the cost of developing the massive Sukhoi Log gold deposit in Siberia has nearly doubled to $6...
error: Content is protected !!