ARMZ litigation
First of all for newbees: The pending ARMZ case is a complete separate case. It has nothing to do with the case on the International Arbitration Court against Mongolia. It is a second case, disputed in front of Canadian courts. Please check the Khan Resources Web page for further details.
Here is what I learned by Khans news release about this ARMZ case:
...The (Russian) Ministry of Justice cited Article 13 of the Hague Convention that provides that the State addressed may refuse to effect service "only if it deems that compliance would infringe its sovereignty or security”. The Ministry of Justiceprovided no reason or explanation for why service would infringe Russian sovereignty or security...
And here is the text of the Hague Convention says in Article 13:
----------------------------
Article 13
Where a request for service complies with the terms of the present Convention, the State addressed may refuse to comply there with only if it deems that compliance would infringe its sovereignty or security.
It may not refuse to comply solely on the ground that, under its internal law, it claims exclusive jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the action or that its internal law would not permit the action upon which the application is based.
The Central Authority shall, in case of refusal, promptly inform the applicant and state the reasons for the refusal.
--------------------
The Russian Ministry did not state the reasons for the refusal as Article 13 requires it. Thus the Russian Ministry had breached the rules of Article 13 of the Hague Convention.
Why do they not deliver requested reasons ? Because they simply can´t deliver any reason !
To state, that legal actions would “infringe the sovereignty or security of Russia” is a joke. The disputed subject (the project in Mongolia) is on the territory of a third nation. To my knowledge Mongolia has not joined the Russian Federation…
Sovereignty and security matters for Russia are limited to the territory of the Russian Federation. To extend Russian sovereignty and security matters virtually to a third independent nation like Mongolia is not possible and breaches itself all common international laws.
Ok, I shall calm down now.
As a small shareholder I just wanted to put inside my 5 cents here - about that pending ARMZ case.
sailor8
Here is what I learned by Khans news release about this ARMZ case:
...The (Russian) Ministry of Justice cited Article 13 of the Hague Convention that provides that the State addressed may refuse to effect service "only if it deems that compliance would infringe its sovereignty or security”. The Ministry of Justiceprovided no reason or explanation for why service would infringe Russian sovereignty or security...
And here is the text of the Hague Convention says in Article 13:
----------------------------
Article 13
Where a request for service complies with the terms of the present Convention, the State addressed may refuse to comply there with only if it deems that compliance would infringe its sovereignty or security.
It may not refuse to comply solely on the ground that, under its internal law, it claims exclusive jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the action or that its internal law would not permit the action upon which the application is based.
The Central Authority shall, in case of refusal, promptly inform the applicant and state the reasons for the refusal.
--------------------
The Russian Ministry did not state the reasons for the refusal as Article 13 requires it. Thus the Russian Ministry had breached the rules of Article 13 of the Hague Convention.
Why do they not deliver requested reasons ? Because they simply can´t deliver any reason !
To state, that legal actions would “infringe the sovereignty or security of Russia” is a joke. The disputed subject (the project in Mongolia) is on the territory of a third nation. To my knowledge Mongolia has not joined the Russian Federation…
Sovereignty and security matters for Russia are limited to the territory of the Russian Federation. To extend Russian sovereignty and security matters virtually to a third independent nation like Mongolia is not possible and breaches itself all common international laws.
Ok, I shall calm down now.
As a small shareholder I just wanted to put inside my 5 cents here - about that pending ARMZ case.
sailor8
0 Response to "ARMZ litigation"
Post a Comment