Menu
Close

California

lse:frr

#21

Documents prepared by FRR and the unknown is are these a draft that has as yet not been heard by the court. Arsenal221 posted an interesting excerp that sugests that they have been heard and agreed just not signed as yet.

Arsenal221
Going on the paragraph below from daniel1son post this morning, it does seem to say that the court has heard the oral arguments of counsel. So to me that looks like the draft that Frr have put togeather, comes from what was heard in chambers from the judge.

The Court, having considered the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (the “Motion”) of Plaintiffs Frontera Resources Corporation and Frontera International Corporation (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), the opposition thereto, and having heard the oral argument of counsel and having found good cause to do so, hereby orders as follows:


#22

“Change of attitude from the big time investing experts here and LSE today.

People are starting to realise what an arrogant big mouthed dumb ass Zaza is, and how much he is going to cost them.

Sqeaky bum time suckers.“

…sorry Booster…you were saying ??


#23

Posted by Dmatt22/Daniel1son (LSE). Recent court pdf docs:

Again much appreciated Dmatt22!


#24

Just posted by Zeninvestor on LSE.

Timescale of events.

Just been reading the court documents.

On April 14, Frontera file their complaint against Hope in the California court.

On April 16, Hope is served with a summons informing him that a lawsuit has been filed against him in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. He is given 21 days to respond.

On April 17, Hope’s lawyers, Maples, e-mail Frontera in retaliation, with an enforcement notice for default on the equitable mortgage.

On April 24, Frontera file an amendment to their complaint of April 14 adding this attempt to seize the assets of FRCC (Frontera Resources Caucasus Corporation) to the charges against Hope and applying for injunctive relief to stop him.

On April 25, a motion for a temporary restraining order against Hope is filed citing lots of US cases as precedent, including US cases adjudicating according to Cayman law in cases involving companies incorporated in the Cayman Islands. (The lawyers have clearly done their homework and it makes you wonder why Kawaley’s first interim judgement was so negative. I think he was rash - and now knows it).

On April 25, the Order for the temporary restraining order is drawn up (we assume by Frontera’s lawyers) and awaits signature from a judge.

So, the big guns are out. The question for me is what else do FRR have on Hope other than he blocked JCAM’s loan and Zaza’s loan back in April 2018 ? (Kawaley wasn’t impressed by that argument).

What information do they have that he actively brought about the delisting ? (Is it simply that he went to war with Frontera over the interest payment or is it that he was pulling strings with the Nomad?)

Why do they maintain that they haven’t defaulted ? Does that argument stand up (see below) ?

“Plaintiffs dispute that they materially breached their obligations under the Equitable Mortgage. However, to the extent there was breach of the Equitable Mortgage, such a breach was a direct result of Defendants’ tortious actions described within this pleading. In other words, Defendants are now attempting to lead the horses out of the very barn door that they opened.”

What are the assets of FRCC as opposed to FRC or FIC ?

Can someone remind me who Elmar Finance is (based in Athens) - presumably something to do with Constantine Nicandros ?

This is turning out to be the most expensive whodunnit I have ever read. Just waiting for the time and money spent to be returned in spades.


#25

…and this just now from Oopsi and it’s getting rather complicated to say the least! :confounded: :scream:

"We effectively find ourselves in the same position we were in when we applied for injunctive relief before the Cayman courts. The difference on this occasion is that we are now at the mercy of the Californian courts.

As usual, there are more questions than answers. Some quick thoughts:

Why, if we had injunctive relief secured in Cayman (albeit temporarily) did we issue proceedings in California to go through the whole process again? I suspect this is because ultimately we felt that we would lose on the merits given the Judge’s initial comments. There may be an element of forum shopping here and we took legal advice in California which offered better chances of success/create more tactical pressure(jury trial). Hope’s enforcement notice is also a direct response to the issue of proceedings in California and shows the battle really hotting up. Had we not issued proceedings there, I doubt he would have taken these steps (after all he had the chance since the alleged default occurred on 10 October 2018 and he hadn’t). I just hope the advice we have on securing injunctive relief accords with the Judge’s view.

The $64,000 question is what is the current status of the proceedings in Cayman? If the injunction was still in force then I sincerely doubt that Hope would have been able to issue an enforcement notice in Cayman or take any insolvency steps given that Frontera Resources Caucasus Corporation is incorporated in the Cayman Islands. There are three possible scenarios. The first that the injunction has been discharged. I don’t think this is plausible as the matter does not appear to have reached the Court of Appeal. The second is that Hope is ignoring the injunction and will rely on proceedings in California. That just seems plain daft. Thirdly, and the view that seems most plausible at the moment, is that the Cayman proceedings, including the injunction, have been stayed. This makes more sense given that there was a hearing for an adjourned summons in Cayman and the Californian proceedings were issued just before the hearing of the adjourned summons in Cayman. This theory also has credence because not once in the amended Californian summons do we reference the Cayman injunction and there being a breach of those terms. It also explains why Maples (Cayman based) have now issued the enforcement notice as if there was an injunction in place, I would assume (although I haven’t seen the terms of the injunction) it would apply to third parties and Maples/Outrider would be in contempt if it took steps in contravention of the injunction.

I think we will know one way or another very soon – injunctive proceedings are by their very nature urgent and it is even more pressing in this case. The Californian legal system seems transparent and expeditious so expect a hearing and decision very soon."


#26

Oopsi part 2

"Also look at the timings which are interesting. 14 April Frontera issue proceedings in California, 15 April hearing in Cayman, 17 April enforcement notices issued. What is odd is that we wait until 24 April to amend the summons to include injunctive relief proceedings. These injunctive proceedings are of the utmost importance to FRR and its very existence. I have injuncted the same night/next day in similar circumstances. I’m not an expert on the US legal system
but 7 days in the circumstances is a long time. The amended summons for injunctive relief is virtually identical to the original summons filed in the Californian proceedings so not much extra work required there.

My guess is the delay was because they tried to work out a settlement but it appears that hasn’t proved possible. Once negotiations broke down , FRR had no alternative. So although on the face of it it appears that we are far away from resolving this matter the reality maybe that we are closer than people think."


#27

I think oopsi has it nailed. Not much more to add other than should we get the injunction granted and the all clear to have a jury trial this would be a terrifying prospect for Hope.

Good luck all.


#28

Looks like its all over for Frontera folks and it appears Zaza has been telling you lot porkies about only taking a legal case on if they can win it.

As previously suggested it appears they have been told to sling their shady hooks by the Caymans.

The judges appear to be laughing at the so called evidence being put forward by SN.


#29

New Court documents have appeared (with July/August 2019 dates) as noted by garytrader (LSE).

“CLERK’S NOTICE RE REASSIGNED CASE: You are notified that the Court has scheduled an Initial Case Management Conference before Judge Richard Seeborg upon reassignment. For a copy of Judge Seeborg’s Standing Order and other information, please refer to the Court’s website at www.cand.uscourts.gov. Parties or counsel may appear personally at 10:00 a.m. or file a request to appear by telephone at 11:00 am. If any party files such a request to appear by telephone, the Case Management Conference shall be moved to 11:00 am to be held telephonically. All parties shall appear telephonically and must contact Court Conference at 866/582-6878 at least one week prior to the Conference. Case Management Statement due by 7/25/2019. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/1/2019 at 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 03, 17th Floor. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2019) (Entered: 04/26/2019)”


#30

I can’t see any reason for the injunction not to be granted and for a request for jury trial to proceed. Surely everyone deserves their day in court? Unless our evidence really is very poor in which case Zaza and Steve would have made a catastrophic error of judgement.

Does anyone have the examples FRR cited of director duties legal cases to hand?

A worrying point for me is there’s no mention of the Durham loan, I can only assume this is dependant on the legal outcome.

Cheers


#31

“An interesting update from California, it appears Hope has now lost the initiative.”

“Looks like its all over for Frontera folks and it appears Zaza has been telling you lot porkies about only taking a legal case on if they can win it.”

Booster…I’m confused…which one is it…I know you find it difficult…but which one ??


#32

Just read the constructive posts Nett53 it won’t stop. Booster will just keep on niggling at varying frequencies. Tune out Nett53, to continue the radio analogies.


#33

The information provided yesterday morning was incomplete, as more information has become available it has become clear, as I suggested earlier in the week that Zaza had lost his case in Caymans and has moved to try his luck again in California.

The facts confirm that Zaza was lying when he said he would only take on a case if he was SURE he was to win.

The case also confirms that Zaza is a clown. and is in the process of gambling your money away in what appears to be a personal vendetta against Hope.

In short the rampers on here like Poohead are all idiots.


#34

Hey everyone, does anyone have the legal cases FRR cited to hand?
On the move so limited to check the court docs.
Cheers


#35

The company will have to a pay a couple of million to YA i n July, so god knows how they are going to do that.

Are they still expecting that loan to come through. I would have thought it would have been sorted by now.


#36

easy i may pay that fool.


#37

Hes not moving to California to try his luck again, its to do with jurisdiction numpty.


#38

As there are few “facts” all is guesswork but fwiw I agree with IrishPaul, something came up in the Caymans possibly and taken to California for a reason.
It does show (to me) that an oocs isn’t on the table atm.


#39

Intraday Movers: Frontera Resources Corporation (LON:FRR) 27/04/2019

You’ve got to laugh! :joy::confounded::gun:

https://stockdigest.info/2019/04/27/intraday-movers-frontera-resources-corporation-lonfrr/?fbclid=IwAR2zO65a1C_5thDSpPooF0ajaNFS009SLpwxDAWn4ilpkLISVXwH7nGz6iM


#40

Your only chance is the loan funding coming through before the case ends.