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 : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Confluence who wrote (1161)	5/20/1998 12:04:00 AM
From: INFOMAN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

It is definitely not the case that mineral rights not registered within 2 years revert to the state. The Green paper you refer to , is still a discussion document which then has to become a white paper to be presented to Parliament and then if it is acceptable , becomes law.This rarely happens without major changes being made to the original Green paper. There is no precedent for rights to revert to the state and I once again refer to my first posting:'3. As a result of the manner in which mineral rights were registered prior to 1937, it was impossible for an Executor to do a mineral search if he did not have the description of the property.This is an everyday occurrence and the Deeds Registries Act specifically makes provision for these cases in Section 71 thereof.' I believe that the case will be heard on Thursday.

To: Confluence who wrote (1161)	5/20/1998 12:52:00 AM
From: DavidA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Confluence, As you have noted, that is preciously the issue which is to be addressed. If an heir to the mineral rights has not obtained cession thereof and a period of not less than two years has expired from the date on which he became so entitled, section 17 can be invoked. However, most unusual is that we are lead to believe that (29) heirs consistently have no record or knowledge of these predecessors, which dates back less then thirty years, upon which time they had died. In being informed that this group consists of prominent business people, doctors lawyers is Infoman to confirm that these beneficiaries had never disclosed the estate in review of contents and distribution. I find it odd that an Heir has presented a thorough DD of there findings "News Flash" and then have the tenacity to directly state that they had no formal knowledge of there descendents in question, to imply that the existence of any mineral rights were unknown, comfortably speaking. P.S. This reminds of the movie "Sting" however in this event NGS are still to be stung, with the implementation of section 17...