5.7 C
Belgrade
Supported byspot_img
spot_img

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

Member of Europium Groupspot_img
Supported byspot_img

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.

Supported by

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

 

 

 

Supported byElevatePR Digital

Related News

Arras Minerals set to launch copper and gold drilling in Kazakhstan in 2025

Canadian mining company, Arras Minerals, plans to start active drilling in the first half of 2025, targeting copper and gold deposits in Kazakhstan’s Pavlodar...

Resolute Mining to pay $160m to Mali’s military government to settle tax dispute amid staff detention

An Australian mining company, Resolute Mining, has agreed to pay Mali's military government $160 million to settle a tax dispute, following the unexpected detention...

Valkea Resources kicks off phase one exploration at Paana gold project in Finland

Valkea Resources is set to begin its phase one exploration programme at the Paana project, located in Central Lapland, Finland. The fully-owned project will...

Strickland Metals hits major gold discovery at Rogozna project in Serbia

Strickland Metals Ltd is making significant strides in its exploration efforts at the Rogozna gold and base metals project in Serbia, with recent drilling...
Supported by
Supported by
Supported by
error: Content is protected !!