Mediterranean Oil & Gas Share Discussion Threads

[bobobob5] 11/4/2014 13:25

If MOG are so sure of themselves, they should welcome an appeal.

Because it would give them a further opportunity to prove LGO wrong.

[ohisay] 11/4/2014 13:10

An appeal - I think not .
I'd give Lenigas a very wide berth after this.

On 3 April, Mr Justice Males further held that LGO should pay MOG's legal costs on an indemnity basis partly because:

-- LGO pursued a "weak and thin" case involving serious allegations of fraud and dishonesty "to the bitter end" which required a full forensic enquiry and led to increased legal costs.

-- LGO courted publicity during the legal proceedings in a way that was intended to raise the profile of the case.

The award of legal costs on an indemnity basis means that MOG expects to recover substantially all of its legal costs and certainly a much higher proportion than if it had been awarded costs on the usual 'standard' basis.

MOG is pleased to announce that it has now received the first GBP600,000 from LGO as an interim payment towards its costs, which amount to over GBP1.5 million.

[mrshaungcm] 11/4/2014 07:16

Notes to Editors:

On 3 April, the judge quoted from various of LGO's public statements in his judgment, including the following:

· an RNS announcement in September 2013 which referred to legal advice that LGO had received from Mishcon de Reya that its case had "good prospects of success"

· an email sent by Mr Neil Ritson of LGO to an equity analyst warning him to "ignore at your peril" the value of LGO's legal claim against MOG

· a statement made by Mr David Lenigas of LGO in a speech at an investor show in 2013 in the following terms:

"We don't have lots of money in the bank. Plus I've got a legal case going on with Mediterranean Oil and Gas and I am going to whip them from here to kingdom come. Now that'll start in May. ... to date that's cost about £157,000 pounds. For me to take them through to the full High Court will cost another £250,000. But we'll win. They were very naughty boys. What's it worth to us? A hell of a lot."

[bobobob5] 07/4/2014 00:35

Your argument is actually circular.

Your assertion that 'LGO lost on facts as well as on law' is only the opinion of Justice Males! You seem to use that potentially flawed judgement (which is *inescapably* potentially flawed on your own argument, because you accept the overturning of judgements by Appeal Courts and also of course by what is these days called the Supreme Court) to supposedly prove that LGO couldn't win an appeal. It's circular logic.

It's certainly the case that one cannot simply say "we don't like that Judge's verdict, so we'll try again with a different Judge and hope for a different verdict". That way madness lies. But one cannot simply assume that Males' Judgement would actually be upheld on appeal. In addition, there are additional angles of (a) new evidence (which may or may not exist) and (b) the principle of unacceptable precedent. If you check the records, you'll find that a recent Judgement by Justice Christopher Clarke (now an Appeal Judge of course) was overturned on appeal on that latter principle.

I would be astonished if LGO were not weighing-up, very carefully indeed, how to deal with this matter. All merely part of the rich fabric of life. And there we have it.

[edgar222] 06/4/2014 23:03

Yes Bob, that's true.

But that's not the test for a successful appeal.

The appeal court would have to say he was wrong. And that is different to saying they would have come to a different conclusion.

The court of appeal very very rarely turnover finding of fact made by a Judge who has had the advantage of hearing the witnesses. LGO lost on facts as well as on law.

[bobobob5] 03/4/2014 20:06

There are plenty of judges who give wrong decisions. That's why one has the appeal court, and the supreme court. Just because Justice Males reached that conclusion, it does not necessarily mean that other judges would too.

[brettmo] 03/4/2014 18:52

LGO would be very brave to try an application to the Court of Appeal after this decision and the virtually punitive decision on indemnity costs.

[glyn10] 03/4/2014 16:01

good news, so much for people commenting that MOG was lucky to win.

"The judgment ruled that LGO's case failed at every stage."

and

"permission was refused" in regard to the appeal.

At least now we can all move on to bigger and better things!

[ohisay] 03/4/2014 14:32

I suspect Lenigas will be choking on his pizza at Winnyfroth Towers today.

The Board of MOG is pleased to announce that, following a hearing today at the High Court, LGO was ordered to pay MOG's legal costs on an indemnity basis.

LGO has already agreed to pay an initial GBP600,000 as an interim payment by 10 April 2014. It will take some time for the total costs payable by LGO to be agreed or assessed and MOG will keep shareholders informed of developments.

LGO applied to the judge for permission to appeal against the judgment handed down on 27 March 2014, and permission was refused. Any further application by LGO for permission to appeal has to be made to the Court of Appeal by 24 April 2014.

[ohisay] 02/4/2014 10:45

Fascinating stuff..

[glyn10] 01/4/2014 18:00

good for you

[doerx2] 01/4/2014 17:41

People can see how corrupt Higgs really is. Lucky to win cc. No morals. Red share price I'm out

[hashertu] 28/3/2014 15:59

Some abstacts from the Court Judgement that I found interesting (other than the result and that the Judge thought Higgs and Morandi were honest and competent witnesses).


Note 57. Comfort letter...

"The (Maltese) Minister agreed that such a letter could be shown to potential farminees, but because of political sensitivities was not willing for the comfort letter to be the subject of any public or press statements. Although this is not specifically mentioned in Mr Henry's e-mail report of the meeting, it was Dr Morandi's evidence (which I accept) that the Minister stated expressly that the comfort letter should not be shown to LGO, apparently because he was concerned about LGO's practice of issuing press statements to generate favourable publicity, but that it was only provided for the purpose of MOG's farm-out process."

In the end LGO were told of the comfort letter in the telecon of 10 July 2012. Not an ideal situation. It makes me think of GKP/KRG. I suspect, but without any real evidence, that GKP are being significantly constrained by the KRG in the news that they release. It irritates some of the PI base but better you don't get on the wrong side of your paymaster. Relationships are crucial, as can be seen in the example above.


Notes 82 onwards. Breakdown of trust.

Telecon 10 July.

Outstanding invoices. Won't pay (can't pay).
Threaten to veto a commitment to drill a well at upcoming OpComm.

Note 160.

"As it happens Dr Higgs was right not to trust LGO to stick to the agreement in principle which had been reached for the sale of its interest to MOG. It is common ground that LGO was not legally committed. It did not regard itself as morally committed either. Mr Lenigas had already observed in an internal email to Mr Ritson that:


"We can still dump the deal next week."

161. "MOG was well aware of the risk that LGO might seek to "dump the deal", using whatever leverage it had (or thought that it had) to extract better terms. That risk fully explains any caginess or lack of openness towards LGO after Mr Ritson's threat to block a well towards the end of the 10 July 2012 telephone conversation. "


Note 74. Area 4 drill to Eocene target...

"Indeed the ERC Equipoise analysis concluded, after making the best assessment it could of the risks involved, that the "Chance of Success" was only 11%. "Chance of Success" is another oil industry term of art which refers to the chance of finding hydrocarbons at all and not to the chance of successful commercial exploitation."

[bobobob5] 28/3/2014 10:33

hiddendepths: depending upon whether one sees it as a frontier basin or not, the Malta COS is perhaps in the 10% to 20% range? At Oilbarrel on Wednesday, MOG explained that their plan at OM (ignoring the environmental noises etc) is to do further flow-testing and appraisal drilling. That won't be particularly cheap. Clearly, if Malta were to come in (which of course it probably won't!) the share price would perk-up and it might arguably be possible to issue some paper and do that work sole-risk; it depends on the figures, but the dilution would presumably not be small. The other route would be to farm it down, thereby diluting the OM asset rather than the company...that's assuming that selling OM (perhaps retaining a GOR?) is excluded as a possibility. Perhaps there's some level of risk of doing more appraisal drilling at this stage, because it's OK if the result is positive, but an inconclusive result (which is always a possibility) or some sort of negative result might well move things backwards rather than forwards.

[sammy_smith] 28/3/2014 10:02

WATCH: Mediterranean Oil & Gas (MOG) - The 65th Oilbarrel Conference

Click the link below to watch

[rayrac] 28/3/2014 09:20

Well I hold, but just lurking.

[hiddendepths] 27/3/2014 21:45

bob - the cos isn't too bad - and the targets are huge. Good risk/reward balance imo. It's a punt though. Ombrina Mare is very low risk but oh, the problems in developing it!

If the market attitude to risk even vaguely reflected reality and the odds, this stock would be much higher. But it is what it is.

[billy_buffin] 27/3/2014 20:50

Yet more anti offshore moves in Italy:



Not a holder but near neighbour Elsa (PCI)

Pleased re result - can never imagine he will appeal...

[philo124] 27/3/2014 20:00

I don't hold but congratulate all holders on this result.

[langster] 27/3/2014 19:42

Don't you just love it when tw@ts make themselves hostages to fortune!


12bn
27 Mar'14 - 08:03 - 7370 of 7394 1 0

Maybe because Leni aren't concerned about what the ruling will do to the sp,work it out for yourself.

[altom] 27/3/2014 17:28

I totally disagree with luminose. Higgs and his board are smelling of roses, violets and anything else you like to name. They have been assessed as very honest but shrewd business men capable of driving a hard but fair bargain ; just the chaps in fact I want running my oil company !!

THREE CHEERS FOR BILL HIGGS AND HIS MERRY MEN !!!

With a little more patience Ombrina Mare will come good, and then we will see the price fly.

[luminoso] 27/3/2014 16:48

Nobody came out of this smelling of roses. Neither company is particularly compelling as an investment, IMO. Neither will particularly impress new investors, in the short term, with their competence and behaviour after the dirty washing was aired in public. So, although both should bounce from these levels somewhat, I'll just keep them on watch.

[ride daice] 27/3/2014 13:58

1waving 27 Mar'14 - 12:57 - 7387 of 7391

Good luck to both companies.
----------------------------

My sentiments exactly. I hold both and hope that both prosper. If anything good comes of this it might be more robust contracts between so called 'partners' which can only be good for shareholders.