'Tusker' pid='49971' datel Wrote:

'steve3752' pid='49962' datel Wrote:

Relker:   Are you a lawyer?  You are giving a legal opinion which I believe is wrong.

IPI has rights created by contracts.  These are private rights.  The government of PNG cannot alter the terms of private contracts no more than the the U.S. government could.

I am not commenting on what those rights are.  Just that the PNG government cannot take them away.

... no more than the the U.S.goverment could.

Perhaps you should follow Exxon's current situation in the Russian deep water Arctic oil exploration project.  XOM has been told by the U.S. Justice Dept that their is no "sanctities" in their contract and their participation with the Russians will cease.

The equation of sorts is the Soverign National Interests of the people (government) of PNG.

Peter (OSH) is in a somewhat polite manner is being told that the Govenment of PNG considers the entry of Total as a operator of a LNG Project is in the PNG National Interest.

" border="0" class="smilie" src="images/smilies/cool.gif" />

Agree Tusked One.  Legally OSH may have the upper hand with the Dispute (which CS seems to feel is the case), but Big Brother is now speaking up and in essense is saying, "This project needs to get moving along quickly.  It's in the interest of PNG and its people overall that Total be welcomed as an investor in this country and that the Dispute is settled in a way which adds a new LNG project.  OSH and Exxon you keep saying you have gas to expand, so focus on that development and if later on the Total/IOC/OSH Antelope project is built out and more gas is proven up in IOC's license areas, and you still ned gas to expand, then we can talk.  Let's get moving on the Antelope project NOW."

'steve3752' pid='49962' datel Wrote:

Relker:   Are you a lawyer?  You are giving a legal opinion which I believe is wrong.

IPI has rights created by contracts.  These are private rights.  The government of PNG cannot alter the terms of private contracts no more than the the U.S. government could.

I am not commenting on what those rights are.  Just that the PNG government cannot take them away.

The IPI contract includes a force majeure clausule which covers this issue.

'jft310' pid='49963' datel Wrote:Steve-An oil and gas lawyer with decades of experience commented on the legal dispute on this board.  .

jft, if it is the post made by 'eyeowecee' then for clarity he never stated that he was a lawyer. He claimed to be "I am a commercial litigator for 31 years". There is a difference, and none of us know exactly what arguments will be presented, or how they will be recieved. Remember, in every litigation the litigators from both sides believe themselves to be right, so statistically they at best can only have a sucess rate of 50%.

Minister Duban weighed in at the CWG Asia/Pacific LNG Conference in Singapore on their Wednesday.  He was first speaker kicking off the conference, delivering Ministerial Keynote.  Good chance we receive more coverage of Duban's comments.

Isn't Hession's Office in Singapore?

Isn't it possible that Botten is really just seeking to get IPP/OSH the same or better deal from Total that IOC negotiated? Currently, doesn't OSH just own a percentage of PRL15, but don't have a deal with anyone to monetize that gas? I could very well be that I'm all confused in my understanding of the deal but I don't think Total has offerred OSH anything at this point. Somebody please straighten me out.

'Palm' pid='49990' datel Wrote:IP/OSH is a party to the JVOA for PRL 15 as is Total now that the sell down occurred. Total purchased its interest from IOC, so it has nothing to do with OSH as far as the agreements/payments to IOC. One thing per the SPA between IOC and Total states is that it would be attempted to have other PRL 15 interest owners agree to have Total appointed as the operator. I doubt that has happened yet as a theory is that should OSH prevail in the Dispute, they would want to somehow bring in XOM as an interest holder and hope to have them named as Operator. Duban seems to be saying "Niet".

Thanks Palm;

I understand the operator angle. I'm thinking Botten's ultimate goal here is not "pre-empting" the operator but is really just negotiating a better deal with Total. He probably feels like OSH has more leverage due to it's standing in PNG and relationship with Exxon, thus can get a better deal than IOC got with Total. Doesn't really hurt IOC either way and may ultimately benefit us shareholders.