Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Walsh who wrote (5465)	2/18/1998 4:36:00 PM
From: viper	Respond to of 10836

If there was no trial following any of the rulings in favor of Mael than what is KRY appealing? The rulings ended what? PDG is not appealing, KRY is. Comparing the U.S. legal system to that of Latin America is like comparing an apple to an orange.

To: Bob Walsh who wrote (5465)	2/18/1998 5:47:00 PM
From: ian dodge	Respond to of 10836

I don't know Bob,....David's info doesn't look like the sort of thing people typically invent, in my experience at least, and besides, IMO the issue is not so much who properly owned the site in 1986/89. It's whether subsequent actions extinguished any or all rights; issues which previous ruling have not addressed and this one is unlikely to.

To: Bob Walsh who wrote (5465)	2/18/1998 5:56:00 PM
From: david	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

hi Bob no offense taken regarding the first3 rulings 1and 2 they were rulings deciding, that the ministery of mine publish the tranfer of the concesion( wich was extinct in 1989)from one miss: Doroty Lemon to inversora Mael (KRY)due to :that th ministery didnt publish it on time THAT DECISION GAVE TO MAEL THE RIGHTS THAT WERE TRANSFERED TO IT BY MISS::DL (EXTICNT OR NOT) 3RD RULING??? IT WASNT A RULING BUT A DECISION OF THE COURT TO"" ADMIT "" THE CASE OF KRY REGARDING THE COPPER BUT ""NOT"" THE GOLD 4TH KRY APPEALD THAT DECISION .IT WAS ADMITED FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CASE IN SEPT 97..AND IS STILL IN STAND BY MR BOB I AM NOT PUTING ANY DISINFORMATION.. WHT I AM INFORMING ITS WHAT I FOUND OUT WITH LOCAL LAWYERS, INVOLVED IN THE CASE COULD YOU PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF U HAVE DIFERENT FACTS?? BY THE WAY CAN WE INTRODUCE TO EACH OTHER WHO ARE U?? REGARDS DAVID