Legal Proceedings
−Removed: After months of continuous effort to meet with the Venezuelan government and resolve the issues related to the April 2008 revocation of the Authorization to Affect and the May 2009 denial of the normal course extension of the Brisas Alluvial and the El Pauji Concessions (which by Venezuelan law were already renewed), on October 21, 2009 we filed a Request for Arbitration under the Additional Facility Rules of ICSID, against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (“Respondent”).
−Removed: In November 2009 our Request for Arbitration was registered by ICSID (Gold Reserve Inc.
−Removed: Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No.
−Removed: ARB(AF)/09/1)).
−Removed: The Company is seeking compensation in the arbitration for all of the loss and damage resulting from Venezuela’s wrongful conduct which includes the full market value of the legal rights to develop the Brisas Project.
−Removed: Our current arbitration efforts consist of engaging and assisting technical, legal, and financial experts, preparing for the initial meeting with the Respondent and the three member arbitration tribunal and developing and filing our initial pleadings, the filing of which is expected to occur in 2010.
−Removed: The Canada-Venezuela Treaty requires as a precondition to bringing an arbitration claim under the Treaty that an investor and any enterprise the investor owns directly or indirectly that has suffered losses that form the basis of a claim by the investor to "waive[ ] its right to initiate or continue any other proceedings in relation to the measure that is alleged to be in breach of [the Treaty] before the courts or tribunals of the Contracting Party concerned or in a dispute settlement procedure of any kind."
−Removed: As a result, the Company and its relevant subsidiaries waived their right to commence or continue with other legal or administrative challenges to the conduct that forms the basis of the ICSID claim, including the revocation of the Authorization to Affect and the denial of the extension of the Brisas Alluvial and El Pauji Concessions.
−Removed: For additional background to the arbitration, see “Part I- Item 1.
−Removed: Business” and “Item 2.
+Added: In April 2008, Venezuela revoked the Brisas Project Authorization to Affect.
+Added: In October 2009, in response to the revocation, the Company filed a Request for Arbitration under the Additional Facility Rules of ICSID of the World Bank, in Washington D.C.
+Added: seeking compensation for the losses caused to the Company as a result of Venezuelas violations of the Canada Venezuela Treaty relating to the Company and its investments in the Brisas Project and the Choco 5 property.
+Added: The Canada Venezuela Treaty requires as a precondition to bringing an arbitration claim under the Treaty that an investor and any enterprise the investor owns directly or indirectly that has suffered losses that form the basis of a claim by the investor to "waive[ ] its right to initiate or continue any other proceedings in relation to the measure that is alleged to be in breach of [the Treaty] before the courts or tribunals of the Contracting Party concerned or in a dispute settlement procedure of any kind." As a result, the Company and its relevant subsidiaries waived their right to commence or continue with other legal or administrative challenges to the conduct that forms the basis of the ICSID claim, including the revocation of the Permit and the denial of the extension of the Brisas Alluvial and El Pauji Concessions.
+Added: In November 2009 ICSID registered our Request for Arbitration and in April 2010, the first Session of the Tribunal was held that established procedural matters and the calendar for the briefings.
+Added: In compliance with the schedule established by the ICSID Tribunal, we filed the Memorial on September 24, 2010, seeking compensation of US$1.928 billion for all of the loss and damage resulting from Venezuelas wrongful conduct, which includes the full market value of the legal rights to develop the Brisas Project.
+Added: As presently directed by the Tribunal, Venezuelas Counter-Memorial is due April 14, 2011;
+Added: Gold Reserves Reply is due July 15, 2011, Venezuelas Rejoinder is due October 17, 2011, and the hearing date is scheduled for February 6, 2012.
+Added: A decision by the Tribunal may be issued by late 2012 or early 2013.
+Added: Refer to www.goldreserveinc.com/international arbitration for additional information regarding the procedural status of the Companys arbitration against the Republic of Venezuela (the Respondent).
+Added: The information located on our website is not incorporated by reference to this annual report and has not been filed or furnished to the SEC.
On December 15, 2008, Rusoro Mining Ltd.
7 unchanged sentences
Following the issuance of the interlocutory injunctions, Rusoro withdrew its unsolicited offer to acquire the outstanding shares and equity units of the Company.
−Removed: On February 15, 2009, Rusoro and Endeavour both filed a motion with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice seeking permission to appeal to the Divisional Court the February 10, 2009 order that was granted against them.
+Added: On February 15, 2009, Rusoro and Endeavour both served a motion with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice seeking permission to appeal to the Divisional Court the February 10, 2009 order that was granted against them.
The Company opposed these motions which were heard in Toronto on April 2, 2009.
On April 6, 2009 the permission to appeal was denied.
−Removed: The legal action commenced December 16, 2008 by the Company claiming significant monetary damages is ongoing.
Rusoro has filed a counterclaim against the Company for, among other things, damages of Cdn $102.5 million allegedly arising from the Companys successful motion for an interlocutory injunction.
Endeavour has filed a $0.5 million counter claim against the Company relating to the lost opportunity to earn a success fee from the successful completion of the Rusoro offer.
−Removed: Costs associated with the takeover defense and litigation amounted to $2.0 million and $5.4 million in 2009 and 2008, respectively.
+Added: During 2010 the Company developed its strategy for the execution of this action, added two additional defendants, amended the claim for monetary damages and collected all its relevant documents, including electronically stored information and is in the process of proceeding to depositions.
(Removed and Reserved)
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.