|
|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
This excerpt taken from the PCU 10-Q filed May 11, 2009. Other legal matters:
Class actions: Three purported class action derivative lawsuits have been filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery (New Castle County) late in December 2004 and early January 2005 relating to the acquisition of Minera Mexico by SCC. On January 31, 2005, the three actions Lemon Bay, LLP v. Americas Mining Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 961-N, Therault Trust v. Luis Palomino Bonilla, et al., and Southern Copper Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 969-N, and James Sousa v. Southern Copper Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 978-N were consolidated into one action titled, In re Southern Copper Corporation Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Consol. Civil Action No. 961-N and the complaint filed in Lemon Bay was designated as the operative complaint in the consolidated lawsuit. The consolidated action purports to be brought on behalf of the Companys common stockholders.
The consolidated complaint alleges, among other things, that the acquisition of Minera Mexico is the result of breaches of fiduciary duties by the Companys directors and is not entirely fair to the Company and its minority stockholders. The consolidated complaint seeks, among other things, a preliminary and permanent injunction to enjoin the acquisition, the award of damages to the class, the award of damages to the Company and such other relief that the court deems equitable, including interest, attorneys and experts fees and costs. The defendants believe that this lawsuit is without merit and are vigorously defending against the action.
The Companys management believes that the outcome of the aforementioned legal proceeding will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial position or results of operations.
The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings incidental to its operations, but the Company does not believe that decisions adverse to it in any such proceedings individually or in the aggregate would have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of operations.
The Companys direct and indirect parent corporations, including AMC and Grupo Mexico, have from time to time been named parties in various litigations involving Asarco LLC (Asarco). In August 2002 the U.S. Department of Justice brought a claim alleging fraudulent conveyance in connection with AMCs then-proposed purchase of SCC from a subsidiary of Asarco. That action was settled pursuant to a Consent Decree dated February 2, 2003. In March 2003, AMC purchased its interest in SCC from Asarco. In October 2004, AMC, Grupo Mexico, Mexicana de Cobre and other parties, not including
19
SCC, were named in a lawsuit filed in New York State court in connection with alleged asbestos liabilities, which lawsuit claims, among other matters, that AMCs purchase of SCC from Asarco should be voided as a fraudulent conveyance. The lawsuit filed in New York State court was stayed as a result of the August 2005 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing by Asarco, as described below. However, on November 16, 2007, this lawsuit after being removed to federal court was transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Brownsville, Texas, for resolution in conjunction with a new lawsuit filed by Asarcos creditors, as described below. On February 2, 2007 a complaint was filed by Asarco on behalf of Asarcos creditors, alleging many of the matters previously claimed in the New York State lawsuit, including that AMCs purchase of SCC from Asarco should be voided as a fraudulent conveyance. In June 2008 the lawsuit was concluded in Brownsville, Texas. The constructive fraudulent conveyance claim was dismissed; however the actual fraud and the aiding and abetting the breach of fiduciary duties counts were favorable to plaintiffs. On April 3, 2009, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas ordered AMC to return to Asarco a number of shares of common stock of SCC equal to those acquired by AMC in 2003, which represents approximately 30.6% of SCCs current outstanding common shares, and an amount equal to the dividends paid on those shares of common stock of SCC since the date of their acquisition by AMC. Grupo México announced that it intends to appeal the referred opinion and order from the U.S. District Court.
In 2005, certain subsidiaries of Asarco filed bankruptcy petitions in connection with alleged asbestos liabilities. In July 2005, the unionized workers of Asarco commenced a work stoppage. As a result of various factors, including the above-mentioned work stoppage, in August 2005 Asarco filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Corpus Christi, Texas. Asarcos bankruptcy case is being joined with the bankruptcy cases of its subsidiaries. Asarcos bankruptcy could result in additional claims being filed against Grupo Mexico and its subsidiaries, including SCC, Minera Mexico or its subsidiaries.
The Company cannot assure you that these or future claims, if successful, will not have an adverse effect on the Companys parent corporation or the Company. Any increase in the financial obligations of the Companys parent corporation, as a result of matters related to Asarco or otherwise could, among other effects; result in the Companys parent corporation attempting to obtain increased dividends or other funding from the Company.
This excerpt taken from the PCU 10-K filed Mar 2, 2009. Other
legal matters:
Class actions: Three purported class action derivative lawsuits have been filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery (New Castle County) late in December 2004 and early January 2005 relating to the acquisition of Minera Mexico by SCC. On January 31, 2005, the three actions Lemon Bay, LLP v. Americas Mining Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 961-N, Therault Trust v. Luis Palomino Bonilla, et al., and Southern Copper Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 969-N, and James Sousa v. Southern Copper Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 978-N were consolidated into one action titled, In re Southern Copper Corporation Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Consol. Civil Action No. 961-N and the complaint filed in Lemon Bay was designated as the operative complaint in the consolidated lawsuit. The consolidated action purports to be brought on behalf of the Companys common stockholders.
The consolidated complaint alleges, among other things, that the acquisition of Minera Mexico is the result of breaches of fiduciary duties by the Companys directors and is not entirely fair to the Company and its minority stockholders. The consolidated complaint seeks, among other things, a preliminary and permanent injunction to enjoin the acquisition, the award of damages to the class, the award of damages to the Company and such other relief that the court deems equitable, including interest, attorneys and
151
experts fees and costs. The defendants believe that this lawsuit is without merit and are vigorously defending against the action.
The Companys management believes that the outcome of the aforementioned legal proceeding will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial position or results of operations.
The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings incidental to its operations, but the Company does not believe that decisions adverse to it in any such proceedings individually or in the aggregate would have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of operations.
The Companys direct and indirect parent corporations, including AMC and Grupo Mexico, have from time to time been named parties in various litigations involving Asarco LLC (Asarco). In August 2002 the U.S. Department of Justice brought a claim alleging fraudulent conveyance in connection with AMCs then-proposed purchase of SCC from a subsidiary of Asarco. That action was settled pursuant to a Consent Decree dated February 2, 2003. In March 2003, AMC purchased its interest in SCC from Asarco. In October 2004, AMC, Grupo Mexico, Mexicana de Cobre and other parties, not including SCC, were named in a lawsuit filed in New York State court in connection with alleged asbestos liabilities, which lawsuit claims, among other matters, that AMCs purchase of SCC from Asarco should be voided as a fraudulent conveyance. The lawsuit filed in New York State court was stayed as a result of the August 2005 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing by Asarco, as described below. However, on November 16, 2007, this lawsuit after being removed to federal court was transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Brownsville, Texas, for resolution in conjunction with a new lawsuit filed by Asarcos creditors, as described below. On February 2, 2007 a complaint was filed by Asarco on behalf of Asarcos creditors, alleging many of the matters previously claimed in the New York State lawsuit, including that AMCs purchase of SCC from Asarco should be voided as a fraudulent conveyance. In June 2008 the lawsuit was concluded in Brownsville, Texas. The constructive fraudulent conveyance claim was dismissed; however the actual fraud and the aiding and abetting the breach of fiduciary duties counts were favorable to plaintiffs. The courts decision did not determine the damage amount. Grupo Mexico has stated they will appeal the ruling. While Grupo Mexico and its affiliates believe that these claims are without merit, the Company cannot assure you that these or future claims, if successful, will not have an adverse effect on the Companys parent corporation or the Company. Any increase in the financial obligations of the Companys parent corporation, as a result of matters related to Asarco or otherwise could, among other effects, result in the Companys parent corporation attempting to obtain increased dividends or other funding from the Company. In 2005, certain subsidiaries of Asarco filed bankruptcy petitions in connection with alleged asbestos liabilities. In July 2005, the unionized workers of Asarco commenced a work stoppage. As a result of various factors, including the above-mentioned work stoppage, in August 2005 Asarco filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Corpus Christi, Texas. Asarcos bankruptcy case is being joined with the bankruptcy cases of its subsidiaries. Asarcos bankruptcy could result in additional claims being filed against Grupo Mexico and its subsidiaries, including SCC, Minera Mexico or its subsidiaries.
152 | EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE:
RELATED TOPICS for PCU: |
| |||||||