SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : PAW - Pacific Wildcat Resources Corp

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: Rocket Red5/4/2018 9:46:57 PM
1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

   of 3422
 
Another Person asked this !!!! Any Opinions ????

Question: Could this also be possible?

To start with I don't know the answer to the question but I will throw it out there for discussion and consideration.

While historically the norm may have been the 50% rule on arbitration settlements might the arbitrator's pick this case to "make a statement"?

One thing that seems different with Pacific Wildcat is that they have a well known businessman from the country where the mine was at (Kenya) who died - and very very curious timings.

With the OJ case we saw it takes far less to get a decision in a civil trail (arbitration) than in a criminal trial.

I suspect a FULL 2.1M decision might be a possibility due to the death and in fact think a possibility might also exist for punitive actions due to the death.

I have no idea, I am just throwing that out as a possibility - the case treated a little more harshly since someone died...

What do others think? Does anyone think the fact that someone lost their life might cause arbitrator's to treat the issue more harshly?

Other opinion's always appreciated, thanks.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext