No Silver for SLW at Pascua Lama ever ever ever
Mountainstar optionor's next Chilean hearing: Dec. 31
2014-12-30 14:04 ET - News Release
Mr. Brent Johnson reports
UPDATE OF THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST BARRICK GOLD CORPORATION BEFORE THE CHILE SUPREME COURT
Mountainstar Gold Inc. is providing an update of the legal proceedings in Chile centred on the claim by Jorge Lopehandia that he, and not Barrick Gold Corp., owns the key Chile mining claims which form that portion of the Pascua Lama project located in Chile (the Pascua Lama project straddles the Chile-Argentina border with the main orebody located on the Chile side of that border).
As background, on about March 4, 2001, Mr. Lopehandia had legal proceedings commenced in the 14th Civil Court in Santiago, Chile (court action No. C-1912-2001), relating to certain mining claims (the Tesoros mining claims) forming part of the Pascua Lama project and registered in the name of Hector Unda Llanos. On about June 5, 2001, Mr. Lopehandia was awarded an injunction prohibiting the transfer of the Tesoros mining claims. The injunction remains in effect.
On about June 19, 2006, the 14th Civil Court (with Judge Maria Isabel Reyes Kokisch presiding) issued a judgment in favour of Mr. Lopehandia. Barrick disclosed the existence of the legal proceedings on page 71 of Barrick's annual information form dated May 19, 2004 (and filed on SEDAR on May 19, 2004, but it appears that no other Barrick information form, either before or after that date, has admitted and disclosed the existence of the legal proceedings and the injunction). On page 71 of the annual information form dated May 19, 2004, Barrick said the following:
"In 2001, an action was filed in Chile by Rudolfo Francisco Villar against Barrick's Chilean subsidiary, Compania Minera Nevada Ltda. (CMN), claiming that it had failed to fully honour an agreement to purchase certain mining claims of Villar located near the Pascua Lama project. Villar's suit seeks to rescind the purchase agreement with CMN or, alternatively, damages of approximately $1-million (U.S.). At the outset of the litigation, Villar obtained an ex parte injunction, barring CMN from selling or encumbering the claims while the suit is pending before the Chilean courts. Barrick intends to vigorously defend the action, which it believes is without merit."
Note that in the above quote, the reference to Mr. Villar is a reference to the then agent for Mr. Lopehandia (his first name was misspelled by Barrick and is correctly spelled Rodolfo). See below in this news release for the Dec. 24, 2014, ruling of the Chile Supreme Court regarding this issue.
Over the ensuing years, various appeals and hearings have been held with divided success.
The legal proceedings eventually made their way to the Chile Supreme Court this year. On Dec. 18, 2014, the 4th Division of the Chile Supreme Court heard the appeal in the matter with the parties being Barrick's subsidiary, Minera Nevada SPA, and Mr. Lopehandia. No decision was issued.
As a result of a request made by the Chile Supreme Court on Monday, Dec. 22, 2014, the parties on Dec. 24, 2014, again attended before the 4th Division of the Chile Supreme Court for further submissions.
The Chile Supreme Court did not issue a decision in the appeal.
But the Chile Supreme Court did rule on two matters. First, the Chile Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Lopehandia, and not Mr. Villar, was the proper party to the appeal before the Chile Supreme Court. Second, the Chile Supreme Court advised the parties that on Dec. 31, 2014, it would hear the appeal of the recent decision of the Court of Appeal for the State of Copiapo, Chile, wherein the Court of Appeal ordered that Barrick's subsidiary, Minera Nevada, pay costs to Mr. Lopehandia.
The Court of Appeal decision relates to legal proceedings commenced at the instruction of Mr. Lopehandia in 2012 in the Vallenar 2nd Civil Court, in the city of Vallenar, in the state of Copiapo, wherein Mr. Lopehandia had sought an order terminating the Amarillos 1 to 3,000 mining claims currently registered in the name of Barrick's subsidiary, Minera Nevada (to be clear, although originally there may have been 3,000 of these mining claims, Mr. Lopehandia estimates that there are currently only approximately 700 of these mining claims remaining in existence, and it is these remaining mining claims that Mr. Lopehandia seeks to have terminated). Further, note that legal counsel for Mr. Lopehandia introduced into evidence before the Vallenar 2nd Civil Court records from Sernageomin (the National Geology and Mining Service) that disclosed that the Amarillos 1 to 3,000 mining claims entitled the holder of the Amarillos 1 to 3,000 mining claims to rights to only salts and nitrates, and not to rights to precious metals including gold and silver. The Vallenar 2nd Civil Court has not yet issued its decision on the application to terminate the Amarillos 1 to 3,000 mining claims.
The Amarillos 1 to 3,000 mining claims are the Pascua Lama mining claims that Barrick Gold acquired as a result of its acquisition of Lac Minerals in 1994 (see for example, page 9 of the Barrick annual information form dated March 31, 1999, and filed in SEDAR on April 6, 1999 -- but note the name of the mining claims acquired is not disclosed by Barrick).
In about early July, 2014, Barrick, through its subsidiary, Minera Nevada, sought to strike the Vallenar 2nd Civil Court legal proceedings. The Vallenar 2nd Civil Court ruled against Barrick and its subsidiary. In addition, the Vallenar 2nd Civil Court ordered that Barrick's subsidiary, Minera Nevada, pay costs.
Following the hearing to be held on Dec. 31, 2014, before the 4th Division of the Chile Supreme Court, Mountainstar will issue a further news release with a further update on the legal proceedings.
