Manati Industries, Inc (MNII)

[ADVFN_paperwerks]

Thanks rstar. That is great to hear that you spoke to Nick.

A claim is nice to have but you can’t do anything with it. But when we go to court we will have a judgement and with that you can start seizing assets etc. they will eventually have to settle a judgement from a US court.

The way I am doing the math is that our original claim was for about $60 million if I recall correctly plus 6% interest. At 6% interest for 60 years we should be entitled to at least $240 million judgement from the court which is about $200 per share at least.

Of course, we will never collect that but even at some % (put in your number) of $200 per share this stock has enormous upside. There is little stock out there and more people will get involved as the lawsuit is filed and eventually a judgement received. The newspapers will report on this.

I am thinking that Nick must be swamped with phone calls and new clients but these lawsuits (mnii & fraz) will get filed in a few months. It will be even more interesting if we also sue some foreign companies for trafficking in our assets.

I think we have an exciting year ahead of us.

[EdF]

Nice action today. Looking forward to this one playing out.

[rstar]

1.28 m OS is also what i was told by Nicolas Gutierrez a few years back when i was in touch w him.

$MNII!

[ADVFN_paperwerks]

Etrade says 1.3 million shares outstanding. I have also seen this number mentioned in a post over at seeking alpha. Does anyone have any information other on this. Fraz is supposed to have 600,000 shares outstanding.

I am back in now after selling out just after Trump got elected. I thought he would not being willing to negotiate the settlement that Hillary and Obama had been working on.

Suing under Helms Burton is far superior in my opinion. After 6 decades of waiting things look like they will happen rapidly now. A massive judgement from a USA court gives many options on how to collect or gives lots of leverage to force them to settle down the road.

Does anyone know if any of the infrastructure or mills have been used by a foreign company that MNII or Fraz can sue in addition to getting a judgement against the government of Cuba??

I agree with Nick- being able to finally sue is a dream come true. GLTA.

[rstar]

some nibbles .155 w .18 ask. thin as can be

this will go nuts if/when lawsuits are filed. review the DD

$MNII!

[Carlito]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cuba/trump-to-allow-u-s-lawsuits-against-foreign-firms-doing-business-in-cuba-official-idUSKCN1RS1VY

[rstar]

keeping their NY SOS filings up to date and active:

https://appext20.dos.ny.gov/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.ENTITY_INFORMATION?p_token=1809C22F03250574F4B5D7DB686D7325EA891DE35A32F8D499C3EE3A924295F387DC21A630A222F3840CA964A8526FDA&p_nameid=A66A40DD518E7091&p_corpid=3928D20AE01417CD&p_captcha=12350&p_captcha_check=1809C22F03250574F4B5D7DB686D7325EA891DE35A32F8D499C3EE3A924295F3A023A1D1CA8F47747E96FB70D97A139E&p_entity_name=%4D%61%6E%61%74%69&p_name_type=%41&p_search_type=%42%45%47%49%4E%53&p_srch_results_page=0

$MNII!

[bigcat2]

Anyone been in touch with Nick? Or know how to e-mail or tweet him?

[rstar]

Nick knows. i think they both have ports , but need to look back- there are satellite photos i think previously posted. we need to review the former assets, location and see whats there now, or easier, reach out to nick as he is likely actively preparing lawsuits and would have done all his research to know who to be suing!

[bigcat2]

Do we know the names (if there are any) of the Cuban companies currently using land taken from MNII and FRAZ?

I believe MNII or FRAZ (or both had ports also)? Are they being used by any cruise lines?

[deet49]

Simply put you don't think that all the CubaN/Military run Companies keep money in A Cuban run banking system LOL Follow The money Stupid We the USA run the world Banking SYSTEM the ultimo objective will crush the already liquidity strapped Island ... they should follow Gilligan and the skipper and leave the tropical nest



MNII CUBA XOM ODP FRAZ CCL

[rstar]

so much news- exxon leading the way:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/godzillasized_exxon_mobil_gets_ready_to_stomp_socialist_cuba_a_bug.html

$MNII $FRAZ

[rstar]

pay attention folks, micro floater here with certified claims:

Nick Gutierrez is the control person for both MNII and FRAZ: "he would also file numerous suits for clients in the coming weeks..



Carnival first company sued for profiting from expropriated Cuban property
Thursday, May 02, 2019 3:18 p.m. CDT
FILE PHOTO: People ride in a vintage car next to a cruise ship docked in Havana, Cuba, August 23, 2018.REUTERS/Alexandre Meneghini/File Phot
FILE PHOTO: People ride in a vintage car next to a cruise ship docked in Havana, Cuba, August 23, 2018.REUTERS/Alexandre Meneghini/File Phot
By Marc Frank and Nelson Acosta

HAVANA (Reuters) - Carnival Corp on Thursday became the first company sued for profiting from expropriated Cuban property as the Trump administration piles new sanctions on the Communist-run nation for supporting Venezuela's embattled government.

The administration last month announced a long dormant section of the 1996 Helms-Burton Act would take effect on May 2 as it ratcheted up the pressure on Venezuela and Cuba.

Under Title III of the Helms Burton Act, waived by previous presidents, anyone whose property was nationalized after the 1959 Cuban Revolution, even if they were not U.S. citizens at the time, can sue any individual or company profiting from their former holdings.

The suit was brought in federal court in Miami by Javier Garcia Bengochea and Mickael Behn. The former holds title to Santiago de Cuba port and the latter to one in Havana used by numerous U.S. cruise lines. Both men are descendants of the original owners.

[b]Lawyer Nick Gutierrez, an adviser to the claimants, said in a telephone interview that Title III recommends claimants notify defendants 30 days before filing suit.

Gutierrez said Carnival was duly notified and thus the suit was filed on Thursday, with others to follow soon.

"I know Bengochea has been in contact with Carnival and later will file suit against other companies including Royal Caribbean and Norwegian Cruise Lines," he said, adding he would also file numerous suits for clients in the coming weeks.

Carnival declined to comment on the lawsuit, except to say it was continuing its normal schedule of cruises to Cuba. It also referred to a statement from the Cruise Lines International Association, an industry lobby, saying the operations of cruise lines that do business with Cuba "falls under the lawful travel exemption under Title 3 of the Helms Burton Act."

Cuba charges Title III violates international law because its nationalization of property was legal and also because Cuban-Americans were not U.S. citizens when their properties were taken.

All other nations settled their citizens' property claims decades ago, while 5,913 certified U.S. claims by American citizens at the time of expropriation were never settled.

Canada, the European Union and other countries charge the United States has no jurisdiction over their citizens' activity in Cuba and they will take the issue to the World Trade Organization, among other actions.

International opposition, and the fear that thousands of suits brought by Cuban-Americans would clog U.S. courts, led previous U.S. presidents to waive implementation of Title III.

Title I and II of the Helm-Burton Act codify all previous sanctions into law and set conditions for the U.S. Congress to lift them.

Title IV bans executives and their families from the United States if they profit from expropriated properties.

(Reporting by Marc Frank; Editing by Tom Brown)
https://kfgo.com/news/articles/2019/may/02/carnival-first-company-sued-for-profiting-from-expropriated-cuban-property/

[rstar]

American owners of confiscated property in Cuba prepare for potential lawsuits
By Nora Gámez Torres El Nuevo Herald (TNS) Apr 28, 2019

MIAMI — A group of cruise lines might become the first companies to face lawsuits under the Helms-Burton Act over the use of properties owned by Americans that were confiscated by the Fidel Castro government 60 years ago.

Beginning on May 2, the Trump administration will allow Title III of the Helms-Burton Act to go into effect, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced recently. The controversial provision allows U.S. citizens to seek compensation for the confiscated properties in federal courts.

Michael Behn and Javier Bengochea, the holders of certified claims for properties confiscated in the ports of Havana and Santiago de Cuba, told el Nuevo Herald they have notified a number of cruise companies that they intend to file lawsuits against them, probably in Florida. The two men were guests at a recent luncheon in Miami where national security adviser John Bolton unveiled a series of measures to tighten the economic embargo against the Cuban government.

“I am going to sue all of them,” said Bengochea, referring to cruise companies that use the docks in the eastern city of Santiago de Cuba. The main terminal and several warehouses in the port of Santiago were confiscated from his family in October 1960.

El Nuevo Herald reviewed a list of cruise companies that Behn said are using the installations of Havana Docks, a company managed by his grandfather that owned three docks and a number of buildings in the port of Havana. The facilities were confiscated in November 1961 and are currently part of the city’s cruise ship terminal. The terminal has been administered by a Turkish company, Global Ports Holding, since 2018.

The list includes 10 U.S. companies, among them some based in Miami such as Carnival, Royal Caribbean and Norwegian. Carnival and Norwegian did not reply to requests for comment for this story. Royal Caribbean issued a statement saying it was “reviewing the recent statements to evaluate their impact on our guests and our company. For now, we are sailing our Cuba itineraries as scheduled and will keep our guests updated if anything changes.”

The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the U.S. Department of Justice has certified 5,913 claims by U.S. citizens and companies for seized properties and losses valued at a total of $1.9 billion — now valued at $8.5 billion because of accumulated interests. The commission’s final report showed that only 817 of the claims had an original value of more than $50,000 — the minimum figure required for lawsuits filed under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act.

Title III also allows lawsuits by Cubans who became U.S. citizens after their properties were seized. One State Department estimate in 1996 reported that those lawsuits could climb to as many as 200,000, although the technical complexities and costs of pursuing those cases could limit their number significantly. Unlike holders of certified claims, Cuban Americans will have to provide judges with evidence that they owned the seized properties, said Pedro Freyre, an attorney with Akerman LLP, which represents clients that do business in Cuba.

Kimberly Breier, assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, did not rule out the possibility of starting a new process to certify the claims by the Cuban Americans.

“They could still be (certified) if the window were open,” she said in a telephone briefing for journalists.

Some experts said that allowing the implementation of Title III is not a genuine effort by the U.S. government to resolve the dispute over confiscations, in particular for those with certified claims on their hands.

“There has been outreach to the Trump administration by representatives of certified claimants; there has been no interest by senior-level officials to meet with them in an ongoing manner, meaning to construct a settlement process,” said John Kavulich, president of the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council.

Meanwhile, companies doing business in Cuba have been preparing for some time to deal with the risks they run.

“Yes there’s a lot of concern,” among the companies involved in Cuba-related business, said Aymee Valdivia, a lawyer with Holland & Knight, which represents European and U.S. companies like Starwood — now part of Marriott — that administers the Four Points by Sheraton hotel in Havana.

The nearly 60 U.S. companies with presence in Cuba are doing so under authorizations issued by the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which handles a number of U.S. sanctions programs. But having an OFAC license may not be enough to protect the businesses from lawsuits, experts said.

Asked by el Nuevo Herald if the OFAC licenses for doing business in Cuba provide protection, Breier would only say, “There will not be any exemptions.”

“That’s right,” said Behn, the Havana Docks certified claimant. “The cruise companies have an authorization to go to Cuba, but they don’t necessarily have to use the port of Havana installations that were confiscated from my family.”

Several experts and attorneys agreed that a significant part of the lawsuits filed under Title III will pivot on interpretations of the language in the law itself. U.S. cruise, airline and hotel companies are concerned about how federal courts will interpret “lawful travel.” That is because the prohibition on “trafficking” with confiscated properties excludes “transactions and uses of property incident to lawful travel to Cuba, to the extent that such transactions and uses of property are necessary to the conduct of such travel.”

Companies in the travel industry could argue their businesses in Cuba are covered under that exception in the law, Freyre said. But since most of the U.S. companies’ businesses in Cuba did not exist when the Helms-Burton Act was signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996, federal judges will have to assess the intention of the lawmakers at the time, Kavulich said.

Companies facing lawsuits could also reach out-of-court settlements to avoid trials, as some European companies with dealings in Cuba have done.

Behn’s certified claim for Havana Docks, for example, has an original value of nearly $9.2 million, now $45 million because of the 6% annual interest approved by the U.S. claims commission. Title III allows compensation for up to three times the claim value, which Behn said would allow him to seek about $125 million in damages.

Canada and many European countries already have said that they will oppose the application of U.S. laws to their companies for doing business in Cuba, calling it an extraterritorial reach. Some of those countries also adopted national laws protecting companies from Helms-Burton, which promises lengthy legal battles.

Valdivia said another possibility is that the companies facing Title III lawsuits will collectively pressure the Cuban government to agree to negotiate and settle the claims.

(EDITORS: STORY CAN END HERE)

During the Obama administration, U.S. and Cuban representatives met several times to discuss the issue, but the talks went nowhere because Havana insisted in demanding compensation for the damages caused by the U.S. trade embargo on the island.

The Cuban government already said that it will not respond to any lawsuit filed under Helms-Burton and that it does not recognize the jurisdiction of U.S. Courts.

———

©2019 Miami Herald

Visit Miami Herald at www.miamiherald.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
https://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/nation/american-owners-of-confiscated-property-in-cuba-prepare-for-potential/article_f6f4560b-edf1-5828-a2f3-e5114503b1f6.html

$MNII

[rstar]

and the lawsuits begin with our guy Nick leading the charge:
https://www.newsy-today.com/a-us-family-will-sue-melia-and-blau-for-operating-on-their-expropriated-land-in-cuba/

A US family will sue Meliá and Blau for operating on their expropriated land in Cuba

April 28, 2019



expect to see ones coming for MNII and FRAZ too

[rstar]

looks like Nick will be front and center in settlement lawsuits going forward judging by New York Times coverage. won't take much interest or buying pressure at all for MNII to see dollars

[greg19440]

We've got a pulse!

[rstar]

you are thinking the threat of individual lawsuits will force the cuban govt to pay the claims?

any settlement is a long way off- but that NICK represents not just MNII and FRAZ claims but i think a whole bunch of other certified and non certified claims- and is obviously able to be front and center in the media as we see w last nights NYT story quoting him-

and yeah, we are up 90% on 17,710 shares and 4 or 5 trades, it won't take much buying pressure/ volume at all for big moves.

$MNII!

[aquaspin]

I think we could easily see $1 here, much more if Cuba can pay the claims. I think there will be lots of momentum here.

[DailyX]

Mmmm now .09/1.45.. need someone to hit that ask:)

[EdF]

I don't have many, 10,500 for me. But enough to keep it interesting

[rstar]

on 3 trades! imagine a dozen!

glad to see others still have shares tucked away too

[rstar]

.149 w 1.25 ask! hey, thats still a really nice chunk! there are many avenues towards a payout,

be it cuban govt, US govt, private corporations, or through lawsuits, a way will open.

just being back in the spotlight, with this companies history, certified claims, and micro float,

we could really get a move on here.

$MNII!

[EdF]

MNII B/A .09/1.25 yowza!!

[aquaspin]

So much potential here! I wish I still owned all of my shares here but I still have 60k that I've held for a long time now. If Cuba can somehow pay, we could see one of the biggest gains ever with MNII!

[EdF]

Excellent news. Thanks for the headsup

[rstar]

look at this: Nicolás J. Gutiérrez, president of the National Association of Sugar Mill Owners of Cuba and who is in control of MNII is the lead quote in the New york Time's coverage:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/17/world/americas/cuba-trump-travel-lawsuits.html?searchResultPosition=1
Trump Administration Announces New Restrictions on Dealing With Cuba

By Niraj Chokshi and Frances Robles
April 17, 2019

The Trump administration on Wednesday imposed new restrictions on dealing with Cuba amid a broader toughening of its Latin American policy, limiting nonfamily travel to the island and how much money Cuban-Americans can send to relatives there, and allowing exiles to sue for property seized by the Castro government.

“In our most fervent dreams, we could not have conceived that a U.S. administration would do this,” Nicolás J. Gutiérrez, president of the National Association of Sugar Mill Owners of Cuba and whose family lost property there, said in praising the decision to allow the lawsuits. “No administration has ever done this. Forget Reagan. Forget Bush.”

By allowing the lawsuits — a departure from nearly a quarter-century of policy — the administration dismissed passionate opposition from officials in Europe and Canada who had lobbied in recent weeks against the move, which could unleash a torrent of proceedings against companies and people accused of “trafficking” in the confiscated property.

The decision, announced by Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, was part of a broader set of policies that also targeted Venezuela and Nicaragua and were outlined in a speech in Miami by John R. Bolton, the president’s national security adviser.


“The ‘troika of tyranny’ — Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua — is beginning to crumble,” Mr. Bolton said in the speech, which marked the 58th anniversary of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the failed 1961 attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro, Cuba’s communist leader. “The United States looks forward to watching each corner of this sordid triangle of terror fall.”

In the speech, Mr. Bolton announced new sanctions on the Central Bank of Venezuela and Nicaragua’s Bancorp, which he described as a “slush fund” for that nation’s president, Daniel Ortega. Earlier this month, the Trump administration imposed sanctions against Venezuela aimed at oil shipments between that country and Cuba.

Mr. Bolton also announced sanctions on Laureano Ortega, one of Mr. Ortega’s sons, who Mr. Bolton said had been groomed as a successor.

The bulk of the speech, however, was focused on the restrictions on dealings with Cuba, reversing the Obama administration’s embrace of the country.

The Trump administration will further restrict nonfamily travel to Cuba, which Mr. Bolton described as “veiled tourism.” It will also limit money sent to the country to $1,000 per person, per quarter.
Editors’ Picks


‘I Want What My Male Colleague Has, and That Will Cost a Few Million Dollars’

A Giant Laid Low by Too Many Blows to the Head


Martha Stewart’s Right-Hand Man


ADVERTISEMENT

Emilio Morales, who studies the Cuban economy closely for his firm, the Havana Consulting Group, said the cutback in remittances to Cuba would have virtually no effect, because the average monthly remittance to Cuba is $200 to $220.

Limiting nonfamily travel, however, will seriously hurt the tourism sector on the island, he said.

“The Obama era is over,” he said. “It’s all over.”
Cubans and tourists queued up outside a Western Union office to receive money orders in Havana in 2016.
Credit
Yuri Cortez/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images


Image
Cubans and tourists queued up outside a Western Union office to receive money orders in Havana in 2016.CreditYuri Cortez/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Still, the details of the travel restriction were not clear. There are up to a dozen categories of such travel, and the administration did not say whether they would be prohibited.

“I have spent the day on the telephone with current and former State and executive branch officials and industry and policy experts, and nobody knows what the actual restrictions are,” said Collin Laverty, president of Cuba Educational Travel, which organizes cultural and university trips to Cuba.

Cuban-Americans with property claims on the island hailed the decision to allow them to sue over their lost holdings.

Conchita Beltrán, 76, remembers well the day that the Cuban government confiscated more than 1,500 acres of her family’s sugar cane fields. Her grandmother, who had been meticulously managing the lands that had been in the family since the 1800s with the expectation of leaving it to her eight grandchildren, saw the announcement on television.
Sign up for The Interpreter
Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

SIGN UP
ADVERTISEMENT

“Castro used to give the bad news around 9 at night,” Ms. Beltrán said. “She was watching the news at night, her head went down and she said: ‘I cannot believe it; my grandchildren are penniless. I have nothing to give them.’”

Her beloved grandmother had a heart attack and died that same night in 1960. Ms. Beltrán, who was a teenager then, has always dreamed of recovering the land.

The Helms-Burton Act, passed by Congress in 1996, gave Ms. Beltrán and others like her hope that they could someday get compensated. But administration after administration waived the provision that would allow them to sue.

“We have written to every president, and everybody ignored us,” Ms. Beltrán said. “We are very grateful to Trump. He is doing something nobody else had the courage to do.”

For weeks, though, foreign officials have lobbied Washington against allowing the lawsuits, arguing that it would harm their businesses and the Cuban people.

“The E.U. will consider all options at its disposal to protect its legitimate interests,” the European Commission said in a statement. Canada’s foreign minister said that the country was “deeply disappointed” by the announcement.

Collecting any judgment by suing the Cuban government is a long shot. Cuba does not recognize United States courts or defend itself against such lawsuits. In the past, courts have seized Cuban assets in the United States, but there are none left to confiscate.
ADVERTISEMENT

Anyone who sues Cuba would be doing so for symbolic reasons, said Mr. Gutiérrez, of the National Association of Sugar Mill Owners of Cuba.

Suing foreign companies could also be difficult. People must prove they are the rightful owner and be able to show that the foreign company currently using it has assets in the United States, which could be an obstacle

[DailyX]

Wow that’s great news! If this starts getting traction I see this going quickly over $1. I remember someone saying this sugar company was doing millions in business back in the 70s. Hopefully they owned the land also. Thanks for posting this.

[rstar]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/upping-pressure-cuba-trump-admin-lawsuits-companies-confiscated/story?id=62455434
Upping pressure on Cuba, Trump admin to allow lawsuits against companies using confiscated property
The administration is the first to allow lawsuits under a 23-year old law.

By Conor Finnegan Apr 17, 2019 11:45 AM
The Trump administration is moving to allow lawsuits in U.S. courts against any company or entity doing business in Cuba using property seized in the 1959 revolution, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Wednesday.
The move is meant to choke off foreign investment in Cuba as the administration seeks to tighten economic pressure on the government there in a repeal of President Barack Obama's opening to Cuba and an effort to punish Cuba for its support of President Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela.
"Sadly, Cuba's most prominent export these days is not cigars or rum, it's oppression. Detente with the regime has failed. Cozying up to Cuban dictators will always be a black mark on this great nation's long record of defending human rights," Pompeo said in a clear swipe at the Obama administration.
Lawsuits can begin starting May 2. The lawsuits were originally authorized under a 1996 law known as Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, but Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama had extended six-month waivers for 23 years because the lawsuits were seen as disruptive, likely ineffective, and particularly damaging to U.S. allies in Europe.
But Pompeo signaled this move was coming by shortening those waivers in recent months and then in March allowing lawsuits against businesses and entities with ties to Cuba's security and intelligence services. Now, lawsuits against any business or entity will be allowed, with no exemptions -- including for American companies. The European Union issued a statement last week to urge the administration not to move forward with the move, threatening lawsuits against the U.S. at the World Trade Organization and to allow counter suits in European courts if it did.
"European companies that are operating in Cuba will have nothing to worry about if they are not operating on property that was stolen from Americans post-revolution," Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Kimberly Breier told reporters.
(MORE: Cuba without a Castro: What comes next as the revolutionary dynasty ends?)
The U.S. has certified 6,000 claims by Americans for confiscated property seized by the Castro regime that were worth $2 billion in total at the time they were confiscated, according to the Department of Justice's Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. Those properties could be worth $8 billion with interest now, although a 1996 estimate found that there could be up to 200,000 more claims that have not been certified, potentially worth tens of billions of dollars.
"Implementing Title III in full means a chance at justice for Cuban Americans who have long sought relief for Fidel Castro and his lackeys seizing property without compensation," Pompeo said, referring to the section of the 1996 law that allowed for lawsuits.
But the lawsuits could also backfire, according to some critics, because it means those European or even American companies would have to now pay compensation, instead of the Cuban government.
"This doesn’t punish the Cuban government; it lets them off the hook," said James Williams, president of Engage Cuba, a coalition of private companies and organizations that lobbies for the end of the U.S. embargo of Cuba. "This decision punishes the Cuban people and American companies -- companies who were given permission by the U.S. government to do business and are now having the rug pulled from underneath them."
National Security Adviser John Bolton is expected to announce further penalties against Cuba during an address to the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association in Miami to mark the 58th anniversary of the failed effort to topple Fidel Castro's government. Those could include new sanctions against senior Cuban officials or restrictions on U.S. trade with or remittances to Cuba, with Breier saying, "You're going to see quite a bit more from us, and this is the beginning of a new process on this."

[rstar]

Pompeo: US law on Cuba property lawsuits to take effect May 2
Shoaib Ur RehmanApril 17, 2019
WASHINGTON: A US law allowing lawsuits over property seized by Cuba will take effect May 2 after two decades of waivers and despite EU warnings, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Wednesday.

“Any person or company doing business in Cuba should heed this announcement,” Pompeo told reporters.

Copyright AFP (Agence France-Press), 2019




https://www.brecorder.com/2019/04/17/490359/pompeo-us-law-on-cuba-property-lawsuits-to-take-effect-may-2/

[rstar]

cuba lawsuits allowed to move forward- this is starting to get noticed

$MNII!

[EdF]

Excellent, thanks for posting.

[rstar]

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/789620/Constitutional+Administrative+Law/Trump+Administration+Allows+Lawsuits+Against+Cuban+Entities+On+The+Cuba+Restricted+List
United States: Trump Administration Allows Lawsuits Against Cuban Entities On The Cuba Restricted List
Last Updated: March 18 2019
Article by Gustavo J. Membiela and Natalia San Juan
Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP


What Happened: On Monday, March 4, 2019, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo notified Congress that the Trump administration is suspending for an additional 30 days legislative authorization for lawsuits related to Cuban-seized property. Beginning on March 19, 2019, however, the Trump administration will allow for the enforcement of Title III of the Helms-Burton Act against Cuban entities or sub-entities identified by the State Department on its List of Restricted Entities and Sub-entities Associated with Cuba ("Cuba Restricted List").

The Bottom Line: The Trump administration is actively considering allowing lawsuits under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act. It is the first U.S. administration to take the step of not waiving Title III, exposing Cuban entities and sub-entities that "traffic" in "confiscated" property to suit in federal court. Multinationals doing business in Cuba should analyze whether steps are necessary to mitigate potential lawsuits under Title III, as well as analyze the limitations of Title III's potential application. Claimants seeking to file Title III claims must serve a letter on the target companies to notify them of their intention to sue.

The Full Story

The Helms-Burton Act (also known as the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity [Libertad] Act of 1996) codifies U.S. sanctions against Cuba and grants U.S. nationals with claims to property confiscated by the Cuban government the right to file suit in U.S. courts against persons "trafficking" in such property. See 22 U.S.C.A. § 6081. As noted in our January 2019 Client Alert, every presidential administration since the law's enactment has routinely suspended this lawsuit provision for six-month periods.

Today, Secretary Pompeo announced to Congress that the Trump administration would suspend the right to bring suit for an additional 30 days, through April 17, 2019, while it assesses the impact of the suspension on the situation in Cuba and related national interests. This suspension does not apply, however, to Cuban entities or sub-entities identified by the State Department on the Cuba Restricted List. Therefore, the Trump administration will activate and enforce Title III to a limited extent beginning on March 19, 2019, exposing the Cuban entities and sub-entities that "traffic" in property which was "confiscated" by the Cuban government on or after January 1, 1959, to suit in U.S. courts. Title III defines "trafficking" to include purchasing, receiving, using, transferring or otherwise acquiring confiscated property, as well as engaging in a commercial activity using or otherwise benefiting from confiscated property. It is unclear, however, how U.S. courts will interpret the statute.

Companies doing business in Cuba should analyze whether steps are necessary to mitigate potential lawsuits under Title III, as well as analyze the limitations of Title III's potential application. Those companies involved in trafficking which are going to be sued will receive notice in writing which, pursuant to the statute, shall include a statement of intention to pursue a claim under Title III, a demand that the company cease "trafficking" in that person's property, and a copy of the Attorney General's summary of the provisions of and remedies available under Title III. Generally, a company's involvement in the delivery of international telecommunications, trading of securities publicly held or traded, and use of property incident to lawful travel to Cuba does not constitute "trafficking" under the statute and is, therefore, not grounds for a claim. Moreover, Title III actions may not be brought more than two years after a company has stopped "trafficking" in the confiscated property.

The Latin American group at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP will continue to closely monitor related developments on this issue and the broader U.S. sanctions regime for Cuba.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[rstar]

sure sounding like they will allow lawsuits to go forward... gonna get interesting if so
White House to announce new sanctions on Cuba over Maduro support, source says
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-to-announce-new-sanctions-on-cuba-over-maduro-support

[MWM]

Yes Sir!

[rstar]

mar 2 https://truthout.org/articles/trump-threatens-a-second-embargo-of-cuba/

filled some soli at 02 eod. was too lazy to call it in on TD and 02 i think was as high as they'd let me bid.

lol. just starter, i'll grab more.

watch here for mar 02- if trump allows lawsuits to go forward, going to be game on in a major way.

might have to give nick a call.

[rstar]

https://psmag.com/economics/helping-wealthy-cubans-could-hurt-everday-cubans

[rstar]

= saturday march 2, 2019

the administration of President Donald Trump on Wednesday suspended it for just 45 days rather than the customary six months and said it would take a fresh look at allowing it to go into effect.

[rstar]

U.S. considering allowing lawsuits over Cuba-confiscated properties

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cuba/u-s-considering-allowing-lawsuits-over-cuba-confiscated-properties-idUSKCN1PA30I
JANUARY 16, 2019 / 6:18 PM / 13 DAYS AGO
WASHINGTON/HAVANA (Reuters) - The Trump administration is considering allowing a law that has been suspended since its creation in 1996 to go into effect, allowing U.S. citizens to sue foreign companies and individuals over property confiscated from them by the Cuban government.

The so-called Title III rule forms part of the Helms-Burton Act, which codified all U.S. sanctions against Cuba into law 23 years ago. It has been waived by every president ever since, Democrats and Republicans alike, due to opposition from the international community and fears it could create chaos in the U.S. court system, analysts say.

However, the administration of President Donald Trump on Wednesday suspended it for just 45 days rather than the customary six months and said it would take a fresh look at allowing it to go into effect.

“This extension will permit us to conduct a careful review of the right to bring action under Title III in light of the national interests of the United States and efforts to expedite a transition to democracy in Cuba,” the State Department said in a statement.

“We encourage any person doing business in Cuba to reconsider whether they are trafficking in confiscated property and abetting this dictatorship.”


If Title III went into effect, it would likely dash foreign investment that Cuba has been seeking to drum up to support its beleaguered state-dominated economy.

SPONSORED


In the first official Cuban response to the news, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez wrote on Twitter that the decision to suspend Title III for just 45 days was “political blackmail” and a “brutal attack against international law.”

U.S.-Cuban relations have nosedived since Trump became president, partially rolling back the detente initiated by his predecessor Barack Obama and reverting to Cold War rhetoric, albeit maintaining re-established diplomatic relations.

Analysts say changes to the administration over the last year, including the appointment of Cuba hardliners to top posts, suggest the Trump government could further toughen its stance on Cuba.

John Bolton, who became Trump’s national security adviser last April, called Cuba and its top allies Venezuela and Nicaragua a “troika of tyranny” in November.

The right to sue over property confiscated by the Cuban government after the 1959 revolution is one of the long-standing claims of older generations of Cuban-Americans.


“I look forward to continuing to work with the administration to ensure that ... the victims receive the justice which is long overdue,” said Florida Representative Mario Diaz-Balart on Twitter.

However, analysts said such a move could backfire.

“It would cause an enormous legal mess, anger U.S. allies in Europe and Latin America, and probably result in a World Trade Organization case against the U.S.,” said William Leogrande, a professor of government at American University.

The State Department estimated in the past that allowing Title III to go into effect could result in 200,000 or more lawsuits being filed, he said.


Bolton's mystery notes on Colombia raise red flags
Even U.S. businesses could get caught in the crossfire, said Michael Bustamante, an assistant professor of Latin American history at Florida International University.

U.S. airlines and cruise companies started operating in Cuba following Obama’s detente, paying fees to Havana’s airport and port, properties that may have been confiscated.

“Legitimate property claims need to be resolved, but in the context of a bilateral negotiation,” said Bustamante. “Those backing the enforcement of Title III seem most intent on sowing havoc rather than achieving a positive good.”

Reporting by Lesley Wroughton and Matt Spetalnick in Washington and Sarah Marsh and Marc Frank in Havana; Editing by Rosalba O'Brien

[rstar]

JDoggs, you still got your shares tucked away here?
looking like lawsuits could be moving ahead soon

$MNII

[MWM]

Interesting!

[rstar]

https://theglobepost.com/2019/01/28/cuba-us-property-rights/

[rstar]

noticed an uptick here and the number of recent articles discussing settlements that i get in a google alert and what you have been posting over on FRAZ. maybe these come back alive soon?

$MNII

[deet49]

Ambassador Bolton confirmed that the Trump Administration has discussed (using a term to create and maintain uncertainty and fear) with members of the United States Congress to permit the implementation of Title III of the Libertad Act of 1996 which would authorize lawsuits in United States Federal Courts for assets expropriated by the government of the Republic of Cuba from individuals who were not United States citizens at the time of expropriation. https://www.cubatrade.org/blog/2018/11/2/z393w7o01r7ch1u1ayuvgx94k14u8k

[deet49]

embargo will last 1000 years

[deet49]

no money no honey

[deet49]

you got that right maybe longer

[TraderAI]

This stock will be doormant until 2025-2026.

You heard it here first.

[MWM]

Chart

[rstar]

was lots of buying recently and seeing lots of news items mentioning settlement...

interesting..