Perhaps the answers we are or have been expecting for 15 years may be on cusp of being answered once and for GOOD.
The data from MTSTACK as translated seems to point to a stage where the courts want some final rulings to take this to an another totally different level or put it in the deep bin forever.
I wonder what the 13th of July may have as any add or delete to the FACTS.
OSSA is looking a little punch drunk these days.
Everyone has a fight plan until the are hit squarely in the face!
C 1036-2021 the Court issued revised evidence points in response to both parties' requests:
Heard:
Whereas, having regard to the merits of the trial, and bearing in mind each of the claims and defenses by the parties, it is decided to revise the interlocutory of evidence issued in Folio 66, definitely establishing as substantial, pertinent and controversial facts the following:
Truthfulness that Mr. Jorge Lopehandia Cortes has active standing and current and legitimate interest to claim the damages affirmed. Facts, background and circumstances that constitute them.
Truthfulness that the defendants Mr. Felipe Ossa Guzman and Claro & Co. have passive standing. Facts, background and circumstances that constitute it.
Truthfulness that Mr. Felipe Ossa Guzman incurred a falsehood about the following points in his affidavit of May 31, 2017: (a) The fact of Compania Minera Nevada SpA being the owner of the Tesoro mining concessions; (b) the fact that Ms. Reyes’ decision in the proceeding before the 14th Civil Court of Santiago Rol C-1912-2001 because of the existence of procedural irregularities; (c) the fact that a mining claim, by itself, does not confer any right of exploitation or exploration to the applicant; (d) the fact that the Amarillos Norte and Amarillos Sur mining claims have been cancelled by judicial declaration, mainly due to Mr. Lopehandia’s failure to comply with legal requirements within the deadline; and (e) the fact that the verdict issued by the 2nd Court of Letters of Vallenar in case C 719-2011 was available on the Judicial website at the time of preparing the affidavit.
Truthfulness that the accused illicit conduct – action or omission – is attributable to the defendants.
In the affirmative, the truthfulness that the act caused harm to the plaintiff.
Existence, nature and amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff.
Existence of a causal link between the wrongful act and the damage actually suffered.
Expertise of Felipe Ossa Guzman in professional practice as a lawyer.
