Pakistan needs a corps of international law experts to safeguard national interests

[Dubious]

Yes, but once it is signed, it must be honored. Or pay the penalties, as we can see.

That's why lawyers who draw it out must be worthy ...and also legal advisors who are also lawyers in some form should be favouring the nation not just their quick penny

 

[VCheng]

That's why lawyers who draw it out must be worthy ...and also legal advisors who are also lawyers in some form should be favouring the nation not just their quick penny

Yes, but the biggest letdown here for Pakistan was none other than the ex-Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Which is why you need lawyers. The contested points are did Pakistan 'respect international law' which can only be established in a court of law where that point can be contested and proven.

You mean actual lawyers and not just those Kwik Fit employees who do not know the difference between "your" and "you're"?

 

[Indus Pakistan]

You mean actual lawyers and not just those Kwik Fit employees who do not know the difference between "your" and "you're"?

Nice one .....

 

[Dubious]

Yes, but the biggest letdown here for Pakistan was none other than the ex-Chief Justice of Pakistan

Chief Justice had a valid local point that the contract was signed by previous owner not by the now ownership and thus the contract doesn't apply..even international court refused to take the first case issued by the company...they had to repackage it as loss of funds on continuing exploration ..

Compensation * for continued exploration despite breaching the normal contract which was negligible when ownership was changed

 

[VCheng]

Chief Justice had a valid local point that the contract was signed by previous owner not by the now ownership and thus the contract doesn't apply.

A new owner inherits all contractual obligations of the previous owners by law. The ex-CJ was simply wrong.

 

[Dubious]

A new owner inherits all contractual obligations of the previous owners by law. The ex-CJ was simply wrong.

Not always...If it were written in the contract it stays...If it wasn't that's where courts come in...
This is why we need lawyers to draft proper contracts that are full proof

Besides if you read ...initially even the international courts didn't take the case ...meaning chief justice didn't do any hanky panky. ...but corporate lawyers found amother loop and exploited it...so the case being discussed is packaged differently to that which the chief justice took up.

 

[VCheng]

Not always...If it were written in the contract it stays...If it wasn't that's where courts come in...
This is why we need lawyers to draft proper contracts that are full proof

Besides if you read ...initially even the international courts didn't take the case ...meaning chief justice didn't do any hanky panky. ...but corporate lawyers found amother loop and exploited it...so the case being discussed is packaged differently to that which the chief justice took up.

Regardless of how we arrived here, Pakistan is now liable for a multi-billion dollar judgement against it, and what's more is that future investors will take a good hard look at this case before deciding on further investments.

 

[Dubious]

Regardless of how we arrived here, Pakistan is now liable for a multi-billion dollar judgement against it, and what's more is that future investors will take a good hard look at this case before deciding on further investments.

Well what WE must do is think about such a case and make sure we draw out PROPER contracts not those with holes!

As for future investors...they will come coz this case showed the world we have gold deposits on top of the coal deposits (that is what the company "used" its money investigating)...

 

[VCheng]

Well what WE must do is think about such a case and make sure we draw out PROPER contracts not those with holes!

As for future investors...they will come coz this case showed the world we have gold deposits on top of the coal deposits (that is what the company "used" its money investigating)...

Let's see how future investor go about developing the gold deposits on top of the coal deposits.

 

[Dubious]

Let's see how future investor go about developing the gold deposits on top of the coal deposits.

Well, it is a tough thing...but yea lets see and hopefully lawyers this time will not leave holes in the contract to come bite us back!

 

[VCheng]

Well, it is a tough thing...but yea lets see and hopefully lawyers this time will not leave holes in the contract to come bite us back!

If and when another contract is signed, of course.

 

[nahtanbob]

Chief Justice had a valid local point that the contract was signed by previous owner not by the now ownership and thus the contract doesn't apply..even international court refused to take the first case issued by the company...they had to repackage it as loss of funds on continuing exploration ..

Compensation * for continued exploration despite breaching the normal contract which was negligible when ownership was changed

If I sign a contract and sell my company why is the contract invalid for the new owners ? It is usually valid unless there is explicit language making it invalid

 

[Dubious]

If I sign a contract and sell my company why is the contract invalid for the new owners ? It is usually valid unless there is explicit language making it invalid

IF the contract has the old compnay's name....it becomes void

 

[nahtanbob]

IF the contract has the old compnay's name....it becomes void

You might have another contract - where the buyer & seller of the old company agree to transfer all contracts, obligations & deals from the old company to the new company

Not always...If it were written in the contract it stays...If it wasn't that's where courts come in...
This is why we need lawyers to draft proper contracts that are full proof

Besides if you read ...initially even the international courts didn't take the case ...meaning chief justice didn't do any hanky panky. ...but corporate lawyers found amother loop and exploited it...so the case being discussed is packaged differently to that which the chief justice took up.

change in ownership doesn't normally nullify contracts. I smell something fishy with the chief justice's action

 

[Dubious]

You might have another contract - where the buyer & seller of the old company agree to transfer all contracts, obligations & deals from the old company to the new company

that depends what our contract states....

change in ownership doesn't normally nullify contracts. I smell something fishy with the chief justice's action

Well the smell isnt from CJP but what was discovered with the coal!

Read the old case!