public area packed out - must have been about 45-50 of us there. started with Texas solicitor asking judge to put an affidavit in claiming evidence Eric gave on 26th contraicts witness statement - discussion with Judge reference to CPR rules - asked Judge to exercise discretion opposed by EX legal - wanted to speak toEW before - Judge said he would consider this and consider whether he be recalled.not sure what this is about obvious our side think they have found an important contradiction.
TK came into box at 10.42 - he looked very relaxed and calm and smiled as he walked to box. I took notes but problem for me was could not hear properly and I am somewhat deaf. It makes me even more aware of how brilliant the reporters have been. It is so technical and to understand what is going on even if you hear it you have to have great knowledge of the case. Do not rely on me . Started with EX pushing TK a lot on what they appear to be thinking that words crossed out in his witness statement re a letter dated 24 november 2007 - i could not pick up what this was about.. words such as not qualified bidder.. articles in telegraph financial times and times i.e. quotes from TK in them - Ex asked TK why he had not attempted to correct apparently what he said in 24/11/07 TK very relaxed and calm. Ex went on to say have GKP had risen in price etc how TK very wealthy man etc then much exchange about tk meeting wempen what the discussions were about did TK mention Gulf in discussion - tk said no it was re Texas. Ex legal arguing that Texas in partnershiip with Gulf How Government wanted US company Gulf was not us company.How TK never gave any credit to Wempen etc.
Judge intervened coiule of times asking TK questions one was about awareness of KRG wanting US company involved. There were some very important exchanges thhat I did not hear or could not understand - TK spoke quietly and I found it hard to work out what he was saying. Could have been exchanges that were very significant and apologise if missed them but nothing IMO too dramatic - do not wish to mislead but i know what it is like waiting for some news forgive me if i have not picked up something important - wait for our usuals to really inform
14:00 3/12/12 Re: UBS Lawyers - What's The Source?
Well my opinion is its probably Erics WS reference his UBS employer asked him to gather certain. Documents maybe title, which they possibly did not.
Either way it looks like we have a little more meat on the bone, to discredit the Wempens case.
TK has his tie on,he's just walked past with a modern and a beaming smile, he's answering all quest Direct not stalling, he's not as sleek as his big Brother .
But on the whole seems to being control.
SP, has drawn a picture that GKP has gained riches since entering kurdistan, wouldn't be there without RW involvement, TK says the deal wasTaq Taq which had been taken when they went to Kurdistan, lots of share price coverage from 05 to date. Lots of talk about BILLIONS OF BARRELS. Values etc.
Todd and Robert may both be oilmen and from the same family but alike in my opinion they are not.. Watching Todd today in court did not fill me with the confidence that his brother oozes. Perhaps I am being unfair as this is only his first day and occasionally I did see confidence in what he was saying and the way he said it. The following report is from my notes and recollection and parts like above which give opinions are mine and no one elses.
1st morning session Texas Council asked that a short affidavit which was sworn by Christopher pinno (Surname uncertain) EW former boss and gained by UBS Lawyers, be allowed as evidence. Tex QC asked for EW to be recalled to the stand. Sp Asked that due to the short notice given to the affidavit that EW be allowed time before going back into the witness box. Judge agreed that EW could be recalled later.
10.42 Todd sworn in - Asked by Texas QC to go over personal statements and happy that signed correctly. Todd has made 5 statements, The last being submitted just as the court started to sit in October.
SP - Was keen to bring Todd back to the evidence he gave regarding a letter about Excalibur not being acceptable to KRG and his statement saying that he had written a letter to the oil minister around 24 Nov 2007 asking for approval to add Excalibur as a non operating partner to the acra bajiel blocks. Todd in his written statement went on to say that to date no letter of approval has been forth coming.
Sp said that he new this to be untrue but continued to state in public that correspondence with the ministry did exist that Excalibur was not a qualified bidder for oil contracts. Sp asked when the Daily Telegraph article by Rowena Mason 30 Dec 2010 came out why did he not get the article amended as you new it not to be true. Direct quote from Todd repeating from Excalibur was not a qualified bidder.
Todd excepted that he did not have correspondence and but at the time he thought it was a true statement. Article was passed to memory crystal (another company) who did not give instruction to correct.
SP went on to give other examples up to 2011 and again asked why as an Aim CEO he had not taken steps to correct the statements. Todd says he believed at the time that it was correct and was grateful that now having looking into the matter was able to confirm that no letter was sent.
Other paper articles where given which SP felt the true position of GKP and Excalibur was not given by Todd. Obviously Todd didnt agree.
Sp then went on to look at how the value of the company has grown since around 2007 until now and Todd confirmed that it was down to the companies success in Kurdistan. But Todd did not accept that it was down to Excalibur but part luck and commitment by the company and share holders to take the risks. Rex may have introduced them to Kurdistan but it was not without significant risks.
Sp then discussed how much money Todd had made out of the company and how many shares he had been given. It was generally accepted he was well paid for him work and that his basic $675,000 was just a part of what he made.
Sp went on to discuss Todds first meeting with Rex in a steak house around 22 Dec 205. The meeting was arrange by Gulfs business development director mr Kinner (spelling ?) Todd says he made it clear to Rex that he was acting for Texas as Rex wanted a US Flag which Gulf was not. Todd also stated that he would need to discuss with the Gulf board of directors so no conflict was seen.
After this meeting Eric E-mailed Todd the following day introducing himself as brother and council for Excalibur. In the e-mail he named both Gulf AND Texas. Todd put this down as and error and so close to Christmas wasnt really paying attention. Over the next few weeks e-mails go back and forward some with both Gulf and Texas and some with just Gulf on.
Todd shrugged this off saying it was early days and he was not at this staged concerned that this important information was incorrect.
I left twenty minutes early and its possible that this was later corrected but SP kept saying the truth is that actually what was being written was correct , this is a Gulf deal which would just have Texas to give it the flag. Todd absolutely not
My personal feelings..... Disappointed that such an obvious error was not immediately jumped on and even allowed to be perpetuated. I do believe that some (Minor) blows landed but can only hope that due to Christmas and that Todd's wife was due to give birth he was as he says concentrating on other more important things.
I am certain that our now famous reporters will give more information and this is just my recollection and thoughts. Please forgive any spelling errors. If I have got anything wrong please can I ask that anyone who was there correct me.
Thank you to those very dedicated members who do this day in day out.
21:27 NOT going on till March / my day in court
Attended for the first time today and one point to add.
CC's suggested/favoured schedule takes them to March, Judge hadn't even seen it yet, as a consequence he hadn't expressed his no doubt displeasure at such a notion before no doubt throwing it out.
JG - basically grassed him up before CC could present it to the Judge, great tactic at the end of the day (everyone leaves talking and thinking about this) and JG will be emailing the judge tonight with his suggested dates moving forwards which will significantly reduce this.
Judge said he'd give him (JG) his personal mailing address to send to and he'd look at asap.
SP got the hump that JG jumped the gun and told the judge.
Good to meet some familiar faces again and some new ones and double thanks to those that attend regularly and at their expense to report to the rest of us.
Great theatre and the best bit
SP - "Mr Kozel, is it fair to say that Kurdistan is the reason for GKP's success and has made you a very wealthy man?"
TK - "It's made me a WEALTHIER man!!"
3 Dec'12 - 22:06 - 242638 of 242642
I thought young Todd did very well today
He kept his cool and he kept his head.
Todd's no fool...Picken is not a very good tactician IMO, he makes it all way too fucking OBVIOUS. Todd should have his measure by now.
Todd was very calm all day...I was impressed. Picken, on the other hand, was getting rattled. Oh dear.
3 Dec'12 - 23:51 - 242651 of 242651
Mr. Picken went on at length about Todd's salary package...
...which is obviously IRRELEVANT to the Excalibur claim.
Todd replied "The Remuneration Committee decides salaries".
Maybe Mr. Picken really is as uninformed as he appears?
I tend to think so, because he thought that "liquidity" = "cash-at-bank"
Young Todd put him right.
And neither Mr. Picken nor the Judge seemed to know what an RNS is.
And these are CONMERCIAL LITIGATION PEOPLE?!
And Mr. Picken asked Todd "did you have any contact with Mr. Kinnear before his sad demise about the Excalibur claim"...
...but Mr. Picken didn't know when Mr. Kinnear had passed away.
Er...er...am I supposed to take this SERIOUSLY?
Of course, I knew when Mr. Kinnear had passed away, and showed the date to one of the lawyers.
How much does Mr. Picken REALLY UNDERSTAND about any of this?
Er...perhaps some of my information, which derives from the public domain, is more comprehensive lol
(usual caveats apply) bobobob5
4 Dec'12 - 00:13 - 242653 of 242653
From page 6 of my notes from today's tedious instalment of The Never Ending Pantomime:
Jonathan Gaisman (rather angrily) to Mr. Picken, regarding the lather's questioning of Todd Kozel:
"This is not supposed to be a memory test"
Oh, and here's a really good one. Mr. Picken quoted the DGA OIP volumetrics for Shaikan USING THE P50 AND P10 NUMBERS AS THE MEASURE, WITHOUT ALSO INCLUDING THE P10.
That sort of selective use of statistical measurements is NOT CORRECT because it gives a range that is FALSELY WEIGHTED TO THE UPPER END OF THE RANGE.
Todd Kozel said "On the optimistic side, yes"
Did Mr. Picken know that this was a DISTORTED REPRESENTATION of the volumes?
If he DID know...oh dear.
If he did NOT know...
...who gave him those numbers?
Were they qualified to do so?
I'm sick and tired of this SHITE and I am off to bed.
Really struggled to hear today, both Simon & Todd spoke softly. So may have missed more than usual!
Usual caveats apply:
Everything I report on below is subject to my own fallibility. Taking notes, whilst listening and not being legally trained could lead to any number of mistakes in my account below both in the essence and my understanding of the events in court today. Where it’s my own opinion I’ve mentioned, usually in brackets. I’ve also tried to include some exchanges word for word verbatim to give you a flavour of proceedings – again these may not be exactly correct, only the court transcript could be used for that purpose. Finally, a lot of it I have documented ‘as it happened’ rather than my reflections from the day – hopefully some rich material to pick over. Please read together with other attendees accounts to fill in gaps or add more meat to the bone. Please double check and cross reference names, dates etc. Sorry for any spelling/grammar mistakes.
I hope that the notes are helpful for the majority of shareholders who can't attend these proceedings.
I plan to attend the majority of court sessions where possible and will supply my notes in good faith. If anyone feels they want to chip in to help cover travel costs drop me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
PLEASE NOTE – I won't be in court tomorrow afternoon, but will try to attend the morning session.
MC – Affidavit served by Eric's boss, to be part of TKI evidence. Relates to oral evidence given by Eric, not in written statement. To contradict Wempen's evidence, not originated from UBS Energy Group. Ask to recall Mr Wempen to address.
Judge – you want to admit evidence?
MC – yes, and challenge under CPR..33.3.2? Because not part of witness statement but come up under oral evidence (some further discussion about this...)
SP – circumstances how obtained to be looked into, if submitted would like to respond.
MC – no need to recall, but contradicts evidence
Judge – not refuse to entertain
SP – disclosure witness statement, intent to rely on, even thought dropped (sorry, missed this bit)
Todd called to witness box and sworn in
Reference to TK witness statements, with signature, factual corrections to previous statements
JG – evidence & witness statements true to best of believe?
TK – yes
JG – Day 8 point arised, on instruction by TK. Did KRG ever ask to see copy of CA?
TK – No
Handed over to Simon Picken (SP)
Reference to statement of truth – signed by Mr Rams (GKP legal), signed by TK – relates to version of defence served 26/01/12 - “on or about 24 Nov 2007 asked KRG to add Exc to PSC”
SP – word 'about' added. Words now crossed out, but signed as truth at time.
TK – believed picture at time
Ref to article Daily Telegraph – Mason - Energy Correspondent (30/12/10)
TK – my knowledge, correspondence with KRG, not qualified
SP – ref to above?
TK – No, other correspondence to ministry
SP – What other correspondence?
TK – do not know...(?)
SP – as public company have to state truth to public
TK – true at time referred to Memery Crystal
SP – Never sought to correct
TK – No
SP – must have thought was accurate, only correspondence in mind must be letter of 27th November
TK – maybe correct
SP – refer to April injunction, Judge Gloster. Mr Rams witness statement served on behalf of Gulf 'on 24/11 wrote to minister....approval never given'
Copy of letter in bundle (reported)
SP – would have worked with Mr Rams
TK - many docs, can't recall everything
SP - did you know this was stated at the time?
TK – don't recall
SP – aware of witness statement at time was served
TK – probably, need to look at it
Ref to letter 24/11
Ref TK witness statement – 'Exc had chance, but never sought approval, never had funds'
SP – refer to 24/11 letter (missed rest of question)
TK – absolutely not, because of knowledge of last 2 years
SP – heavy reliance on 24/11 letter. KRG wont have Exc, until 5th witness statement
TK – absolutely not. Don’t understand question.
SP – now say this was wrong. Not 2007, but 2009
TK – minister asked for copy
SP – not provided in 2007
TK – yes
SP – 2 emails from Ashti received by mistake, after 5th witness statement. Remember timing?
TK – no
SP – suggest approach to evidence unsatisfactory, agree?
TK – no
SP – why?
TK – believed at time correct, memory not perfect, made mistake and admit it
SP – media report reason Exc excluded...remember?
TK – yes, believed right at time
Ref Times article- 'contract lapsed in Feb 2007'
SP – remember saying to journalist?
TL – may have
SP – why say lapsed Feb 07
TK – believed lapsed in summer 07
SP – why said February
TK – may have misspoken, part of article not true, announcements to company correct
Ref Financial times (30/12/10) – 'ended in 2007...haven’t heard from these guys since first week 2007'
SP – who are these guys?
TK – Exc, Rex
SP – maintain correct?
TL – yes
SP – GKP, or personally?
TK – me
SP – discussions between TKI and yourself continues, 5 Dec 08, made offer to farm in, aware?
TK – accept that yes
SP – 2009 discussion with Ashti about Exc
TK – yes
SP – so not heard nonsense
TK – (missed this bit)
Judge – misleading, no contact, then out of blue, lawyers in contact through 2008
TK – took question literally, me personally
Judge – indirect contact?
TK – yes
Judge – was what Financial times questioned
TK – asked if had contact, believed not
Judge – but you had contact
TK – yes
SP – offer of farm in and bringing claim, remember
TK – yes
Ref 5 Dec 08 letter
Ref Financial Times article – complete surprise
SP – complete surprise when you know there has been contact
TK – (missed his answer)
SP – impression trying to give bad claim with reasons
TK – what I believed at time
SP – refer to correspondence to ministry, not heard from them, wrong
TK – not from my point of view
SP – what point of view? Explain
TK – thought they talked about Exc and Wempens, not lawyers
SP – how Kurdistan fits into GK success story. Kurdistan led to GKP success
TK – yes
SP – pre-Kurdistan focus Algeria
TK – yes
Ref Board minutes Dec 2005 – Bus development...Sudan, UAC..etc
SP – no ref to Kurdistan
TK – no
SP – looking outside Algeria?
TK – yes
Ref interim results Oct 2005, ref to 9 block Algeria. Refer to Market Cap. Cash balance $79m at time
SP – compare with current position
Ref 2011 Financial review – cash at 31 Oct (?) $237.6m
I completely understand those who believe the cc reporting here have been and is one-sided! One should and has to be sceptical of everything written by complete strangers and that's exactly what brouhgt me to go and see for myself and if I didn't I would have felt that the reporting was some kind of conspiracy. I was in court yesterday and the only point SP kinda scored on was the change in TK WStats about the letter written to the KRG on or around 27 Nov 2007 which in the end was shown to be incorrect. SP drew reference from various press reports and mareva injunction where TK stated that as a matter of fact. I thought that was slightly uncomfortable for TK and SP brought this up first so he could put doubt on credibility. After that it was downhill for SP. I get the feeling that he's either not prepared for the case to last the distance or he doesn't have much to go on. He asked each question at least 4 times and I wondered why the judge didn't warn him from then. Too much time wasting imo and some of questioning bring out answers that are not favourable to his clients yet he would ask them again! That is why I decided against going today and might pick it up again Thur as I'm sure I will not miss much at this rate! Incredible but true so what is SP strategy one might ask? I think they want a settlement.
Re Mr Pinho's letter: It is my understanding that this letter is submitted into evidence and accepted by both sides. On that development, JG, based on a matter of law, was asking the judge permission to give EW a chance to answer to the contents of the letter. SP agreed but alerted the judge to an ongoing investigation by them as how UBS came to write the statement. The judge agreed to recalling EW subject to SP completing that process. Am I correct in this view? I think that's what I heard.
And for the record...TK did not mention to the court any excuse about having a baby. It was SP that mentioned it and yes TK agreed. Actually, TK's reason for not correcting RW reference to Gulf in the email and draft CA was that it was a day or so before Xmas so he was very surprised to see it when he agreed with Rex that they would both just have a think abt the Kurdistan possibilities discussed after their steakhouse meeting a couple days back. TK thought Esc were 'jumping the gun' (my phrase)as everything was very preliminary at this stage and it was highly unusual to progress this quickly so he basically ignored it as he wasn't about to sign or agree to anything...yet. He said things started to change, however, when they began to pack their bags for Erbil. Aimho.