In arbitration would Hugo still get his cut of gold revenues since we had this deal set up before he asked for a cut? Remember gold prices have gone up since then we assume hugo will demand any arbitration price for our gold be set at the earliest and lowest price possible based on the law.

But that cuts both ways Hugo's cut of all gold revenue happened after the fact. So Hugo can get the lower gold price but he might not get his cut for the first few years because we would reasonably expect to have been producing gold for probably a few years before he asked for his cut assuming the law gave us the permit in a timely manner.

The argument that Hugo's government was acting in a timely manner will be laughed out of court. Also Hugo risks punitive damages does anyone have any idea what those could be? I am not a lawyer so googling old cases where punitive damages where issued won't help since I don't know the underlying law involved in the cases and how close those cases resemble ours.

I hope we have some lawyers here who can ask that or maybe someone can ask Fung what the applicable case law is? Fung can't talk about our case but he can talk about similar cases that are established law and we know he has lawyers looking into this.