Well.....first of all...as I said in past posts, that "clarifying press release" is also filled with lies.....Lopehandia was kicked out of trying to butt into C 1912-2001 in October 2014 by the Supreme court of Chile....so it is a FACT that JL is NOT INVOLVED WITH THE CASE FOR OWNERSHIP OF MINA PASCUA.
Does he have "sideshows" going on? Yes....but that is all they are....side shows in the CIVAL courts.....C 1912-2001 is in the SUPREME COURT.
BTW.....you have said multiple times that the Supreme court decision kicking JL out was "squashed" but every time I ask you to back that up with a court document.....which if the decision was reversed (impossible) there would sure be a court document saying this.....I never get a response....why is that?
Oh and finally....you said " Your comments do not make sense to me. The link you provided simply discusses the ongoing legal action in Chile dealing with Pascua ownership"
Your telling me you don't see a difference in these PR's? Your kidding....right?
Original......
Mr. Brent Johnson reports
BARRICK DOES NOT OWN CONCESSIONS AT MINA PASCUA, CHILE; TITLES HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO MR. JORGE LOPEHANDIA
Mountainstar Gold Inc. has issued the following update to its shareholders to provide a historical summary and clarify title ownership (1996 to 2013) of Mina Pascua, Chile.
As of Feb. 1, 2013, the company's lawyer, Alan G.S. Hultman, received clean titles to the Mina Pascua, Chile, mining concessions. The Mina Pascua titles were issued by the Mines Registrar of Vallenar, signed and sealed by Vallenar's mines commissioner (Conservador de Minas) Pablo Cortes Olquin, for Ricardo Olivares Pizarro, on Jan. 16, 2013. The Conservador de Minas Vallenar is the sole person in Chile, at this date, with full legal jurisdiction over the Mina Pascua concessions, their title, and confirmation of certified domain.
These titles were authenticated by the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile. They have been validated by the Canadian embassy in Santiago, Chile.
The Conservador de Minas, Vallenar, issued title with clean Certificado de Dominio Vigente (current certified dominion) over the following Mina Pascua project areas in Chile:
Tesoros Uno 1 al 30 through to Tesoros Doce 1 al 5: Jorge Lopehandia is legal title holder as of 2013. Barrick Gold Corp., or its Chilean subsidiaries, has never had title for these concessions. False statements from executives of Barrick's Chilean subsidiaries, concerning these titles, have led to criminal charges being applied, accepted and enforced in Chile. Lawyers representing Barrick's Chilean subsidiaries, at Vallenar's Second Civil Court in 2012, admitted to not owning Tesoros titles or domain. This falsification of the Pascua Lama protocol has initiated further criminal charges.
Amarillos Norte (5,200 hectares) and Amarillos Sur (3,400 hectares): These have been owned since 1996 by Jorge Rodrigo Lopehandia Cortes through his mining agent Mr. Villar. These Amarillos titles were in existence before the Tesoros concessions of 1997. The Tesoros titles were constituted after Minera Nevada SpA swindled Mr. Lopehandia and Mr. Villar of their existing claims. The Amarillos titles have had an injunction in place by the Supreme Court of Chile, as of June 5, 2001, showing Mr. Cortes as the registered title holder through to this date.
Mr. Lopehandia was sued by Barrick Gold regarding ownership of the Amarillos concessions in Ontario, Canada, in 2002. Barrick won this libel case against Mr. Lopehandia with false title claims and letters of opinion. Minera Nevada then used this information to attack Mr. Lopehandia in court proceedings in Vallenar in 2012, at the Second Civil Court, in an effort to discredit Mr. Lopehandia. This court proceeding took place to strike out the Amarillos 1-3000 titles (the salts and nitrates claims owned by Minera Nevada) from the Chilean Mines Registrar.
At this proceeding, Mr. Lopehandia was able to show his Amarillos Sur and Norte titles. The judge then requested Barrick Gold, and its Chilean subsidiaries, to produce the same. Barrick failed to produce the Amarillos Sur or Norte titles in its or its Chilean subsidiaries' names.
Amarillos Sur and Norte were validated by judicial judgment by the Supreme Court of Chile. This judgment ordered that both sectors be reconstituted at the original 1996 UTM co-ordinates. These claims override the ABX/Lac Minerals 1994-2013 Amarillos 1-3000 concessions (for salts and nitrates only).
With the injunction C-1912-2013 in Mr. Lopehandia's name, the Amarillos Sur and Norte concessions engulf and override the Tesoros claims of Hector Unda Llanos, which have now also been legally titled in Mr. Lopehandia's name 2001-2013.
The Tesoros concessions are inside the area of Amarillos Sur and are considered to be the areas of greatest geological interest to Mina Pascua, Chile.
The continuation of the assertion of Barrick Gold's ownership of the Tesoros claims with the Securities and Exchange Commission and Ontario Securities Commission is misleading to the New York Stock Exchange, the Toronto Stock Exchange and the investing public. Barrick's filings with the SEC and OSC are fraudulent and libel Mountainstar Gold and Mr. Cortes.
CLARIFYING
2015-07-30 14:12 ET - News Release
Mr. Brent Johnson reports
CLARIFYING NEWS RELEASE -- CHILE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS - TITLE TO PASCUA LAMA PROJECT
As a result of a review by the British Columbia Securities Commission, Mountainstar Gold Inc. is issuing the following press release to clarify its disclosure regarding the continuing litigation in Chile between the company's property optionor, Jorge Rodrigo Lopehandia Cortes, and Barrick Gold Corp., including some of Barrick's Chilean subsidiaries.
Litigation in Chile
Mr. Lopehandia is involved in legal proceedings in the country of Chile relating to the issue of who is the rightful owner of the Chilean portion of the Pascua Lama project. The Pascua Lama project is currently under the control of Barrick and is currently under care and maintenance. Mr. Lopehandia's position is that he is the rightful owner and Barrick's position is that it is the rightful owner.
The initial legal proceedings, which are also the main legal proceedings commenced in March, 2001 (approximately 14 years ago). A hearing in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings was recently held in the Chilean Supreme Court. The parties are awaiting a decision -- see the following regarding the proposed further application to the Chilean Supreme Court by Mr. Lopehandia.
Information as to the March, 2001, main legal proceedings has been provided to Mountainstar by Mr. Lopehandia and his Chilean legal counsel, who has reviewed and approved this clarifying news release. Mountainstar does not have independent legal counsel in Chile, and, as a result, Mountainstar has not had the benefit of a review of the Chilean legal proceedings by an independent lawyer -- see risk factors as follows.
The property option agreement
As background, the company initially entered into a written property option agreement dated May 20, 2011, with Mr. Lopehandia, pursuant to which the company acquired the right to acquire up to a 50-per-cent interest in the Chilean portion of the project, commonly called the Pascua Lama project. The property option agreement by mutual agreement of the parties remains valid and binding upon both parties, despite the existence of mutually acknowledged option payment arrears at this time, which parties agree, to be directly related to and the product of Mountainstar's loss of its stock exchange trading status.
Note carefully that the value of Mountainstar's interests under the property option agreement are directly dependent upon whether Mr. Lopehandia will be successful in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings in Chile. In other words, if Mr. Lopehandia is not successful in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings in Chile, the rights of Mountainstar under the property option agreement will have no value -- see risk factors as follows.
The proposed application to the Chilean Supreme Court to review the two legal proceedings
As stated above, there was a hearing recently held before the Chilean Supreme Court in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings. Also, there was another hearing recently held before the Chilean Supreme Court in a related set of legal proceedings. No decision has been issued by the Chilean Supreme Court in that legal proceeding also.
Mr. Lopehandia advises that he will be applying to the Chilean Supreme Court to have the Chilean Supreme Court delay a decision in each of the above described two legal proceedings and to ask the Chilean Supreme Court to review both legal proceedings at the same time.
Further developments
Mountainstar will continue to disclose developments in the continuing litigation in Chile.
Risk factors
Readers of this news release, and investors in particular, should consider the following risk factors:
1. Mountainstar has not retained independent legal counsel in Chile.
2.Accordingly:1.Mountainstar has not independently determined the status of the legal proceedings in Chile;
2.Mountainstar has not independently determined the status of the mining claims in Chile, including the ownership and the rights and encumbrances relating thereto.
3. The value of Mountainstar's interests under the property option agreement are directly dependent upon whether Mr. Lopehandia will be successful in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings in Chile. There is no guarantee that Mr. Lopehandia will be successful in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings.
4. If Mr. Lopehandia is not successful in the March, 2001, main legal proceedings in Chile, the rights of Mountainstar under the property option agreement will have no value.
5. Mountainstar has not retained an independent professional to determine the location of the various mining claims being the subject of the legal proceedings in Chile.
6. Mountainstar has not retained an independent professional to locate the Pascua Lama deposit located in Chile.
7. Many of the documents provided by Mr. Lopehandia to Mountainstar are in the Spanish language. None of the directors and officers of Mountainstar speak or read the Spanish language.
8.Mr. Lopehandia claims to be the rightful owner of Pascua Lama because, amongst other things, he is the registered owner of mining claims of at least 8,600 hectares. But Barrick claims that the Pascua Lama project area is much larger than that. Barrick also claims that there was a relatively small mineral reserve at the time of acquisition. For example, at page 42 of the Barrick annual information form filed in SEDAR on April 6, 1999, Barrick stated the following: "Discovered originally in 1987, the project has been significantly expanded since its acquisition by Barrick. At the time of acquisition, reserves in the Esperanza orebody were 1.8 million ounces. Through extensive exploration in 1995, the company discovered the adjacent Quebrada de Pascua deposit. Exploration efforts since then have significantly increased reserves and mineralization in that deposit. At Dec. 31, 1998, total reserves at Pascua were 14 million ounces of gold and 440 million ounces of silver."
So, there is risk that even if Mr. Lopehandia succeeds in his claim to ownership of certain mining claims, those mining claims may not form a significant portion of the Pascua Lama deposit and may be of limited value.
9. The matters relating to the Pascua Lama mineral deposit and mining claims forming Pascua Lama and the rights and attributes of those mining claims are very complex.
10. Mountainstar has not retained any independent professionals in Chile to deal with the complex matters.
11. Mountainstar currently does not have funds to further make payments to Mr. Lopehandia.
12. Mountainstar currently does not have funds to finance the continuing business of Mountainstar.
13. Any future equity financing may lead to significant dilution.
14. Mountainstar may be unable to raise sufficient funds to exercise the options contained in the property option agreement with Mr. Lopehandia.
15. Mountainstar has advanced a large sum of money (the unaudited amount as of May 31, 2015, is $4,488,534 (U.S.)) to Mr. Lopehandia toward the exercise of an option with Mr. Lopehandia without obtaining any security for those advances and without any restriction as to how those funds are to be used by Mr. Lopehandia. If Mountainstar fails to exercise the option contained in the property option agreement, all payments made by Mountainstar are non-refundable.
16. Mountainstar currently has a large amount of current liabilities. As of Jan. 31, 2015, those current liabilities totalled $3,421,558. The amount as of April 30, 2015, is expected to be larger and the amount as of the date of this news release is expected to be yet larger.
17. There is no assurance that Mountainstar can continue to obtain necessary equity or debt financings to meet its obligations and finance its continuing business.
18. As a very senior mining company, Barrick should have ample resources and personnel in Chile to ensure that Barrick has proper title to its mining properties.
19. As a very senior mining company, Barrick should be considered to have well informed itself of all litigation risks and yet has not disclosed the litigation of Mr. Lopehandia as being a material risk.
20. Barrick has claimed in a letter dated March 29, 2011, that the March 2, 2011, news release of Mountainstar was defamatory and threatened legal proceedings. Although Mountainstar is not aware of Barrick commencing any legal proceedings, Barrick may commence such legal proceedings in the future or other legal proceedings claiming that it has been defamed. If Barrick does commence legal proceedings claiming defamation, it may take years to revolve. Any such litigation could be extremely expensive for Mountainstar to defend, and Mountainstar currently has no funds.
21. Barrick has far greater financial resources than does Mountainstar.
Mountainstar has provided this news release to Mr. Lopehandia and his Chilean legal counsel, who has reviewed and approved the terms of this news release.
