Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The Representor has acquired by way of assignment rights under arbitration awards made against the Democratic Republic of Congo which it is seeking to enforce both here and in other jurisdictions. It currently claims some US$116m with daily interest accruing.
The first party cited, which is a Jersey incorporated company, has a 70% interest in the Kibali gold mine operation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The remaining 30% is owned by the Second Respondent (Okimo) which is wholly owned by the Democratic Republic of Congo and which the Representor maintains is an organ of the state. The first party cited is in turn owned by the second party cited (and another company Anglo-Gold). The second party cited is a publicly quoted company.
On 30 th November, 2009, the second party cited gave notice of an EGM for the approval of its acquisition (through the first party cited) from Okimo of a further 20% in Kibali gold mines, bringing its total ownership up to 90%. The consideration payable is US$113,600,000. The acquisition was contingent upon a number of factors including the approval of the shareholders at the EGM due to be held this Wednesday at 8.30 a.m.
The Representor applied to the Court ex parte on Friday 11 th December to injunct that contingent debt and to seek disclosure of the Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) and other documents referred to in the SPA, together with information that any of the parties cited might have about other assets of the First and Second Respondents including any bank account details. Those injunctions were granted and are set out in the two acts of Court issued that day for service upon the parties cited affected in the early evening of Friday 11 th December.
The Representor's application was premised upon the SPA (not then disclosed) creating a debt in favour of the Second Respondent upon which it could distrain. It was asserted that the parties citied were innocent parties who are not likely to collude with the First or Second Respondents.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.