Saturday, March 26, 2011

TNR Gold: Los Azules: TNR Gold Corp. v. MIM Argentina Exploraciones S.A., Minera Andes Inc. 2011 BCSC 243 – 2011/02/28 Supreme Court tnr.v,, tck, cuu.v, czx.v,,,,,,,,,, bhp, fcx

Now we can have a better understanding of the recent news from Minera Andes:

Minera Andes to spin out Los Azules.

Enhanced by Zemanta


Retirefund said...

It would appear from reading the SC case in BC that TNR has essentially won the first round, having the third party application dismissed.

What are your thoughts?

Sufiy said...

You have put it exactly right - according to the Judgment:

[1] These motions concern applications brought by the defendants Minera Andes Inc. and related companies pursuant to Rule 6-1(1)(b)(i) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules (the “Rules”) for leave to amend their Response to Civil Claim, Counterclaim and Third Party Notice and for an order pursuant to Rule 22-5 that Supreme Court action, Vancouver Registry No. S-103104 (the “Solicitors’ Action”), be tried at the same time as this action.

[2] The third parties (“TNR’s Lawyers”) seek an order striking out the Third Party Notice on the ground it discloses no reasonable cause of action. The plaintiffs support this application.


[51] Accordingly the defendants’ applications to amend its Third Party Notice and to join this action with Supreme Court Action No. S103104 are dismissed.

[52] The defendants’ application to amend its Response to Civil Claim and to amend its Counterclaim is allowed.

[53] TNR’s Lawyers’ application to strike the Third Party Notice is allowed.

[54] TNR’s Lawyers and the plaintiffs will recover costs for these applications.

Bob Ahrens said...

Some more insight from the history section of the Information Form for 2010.