zoomIllustration. Image Courtesy: Pexels under CC0 Creative Commons license An Arbitral Tribunal of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) has found that the Government of Djibouti’s action of seizing control of the Doraleh Container Terminal from DP World was illegal, DP World informed.The LCIA Tribunal has ruled that Doraleh Container Terminal’s Concession Agreement “remains valid and binding notwithstanding Law 202 and the 2018 Decrees.”Law 202 and the referenced decrees were devices enacted by Djibouti to seek to evade Djibouti’s contractual obligations, and these have been found to be ineffective in law, according to a statement released by DP World.“DP World will now reflect on the ruling and review its options,” the port operator added.On 22 February 2018, the Government of Djibouti seized control of the Doraleh Container Terminal from DP World, who designed, built and operated the terminal following a concession awarded in 2006.Djibouti has insisted so far that the contract termination was done via a transparent legal process, highlighting that DP World lost all rights to the concession contract.The government claimed that the decision was made after failed attempts to renegotiate the concession terms and that it is grounded on the general interest of the country’s citizens.Namely, the country was not satisfied with the revenues from the operation of the terminal, adding that its poor performance was hampering the economic development and growth of Djibouti.Following the termination, DP World launched a new arbitration in February 2018 seeking a declaration that the concession was valid and binding on the government.
CALGARY – A judge has ruled an aging cattleman showing signs of dementia was not duped when he sold part of his land in the Rocky Mountain foothills to a young couple for a modest sum to keep the property as a working ranch.John Burby sold the property near Bragg Creek, Alta., to Luke and Laura Ball for $600,000 in a deal that was signed on a small slip of paper in 2010 when he was 86 years old.Two years later the couple listed part of the land for sale with a realtor to help fund building a house and sought to subdivide it to provide parcels for their children in the future.John Burby’s brother, Brian Burby, filed a lawsuit seeking to reverse the 2010 sale. He argued the land was worth up to $3.9 million and that his brother was in mental decline when he agreed to sell.The Balls acknowledged the land was priced under market value. But they argued that John Burby gave them a good deal because he valued ranching life, hard work and ranching families.Luke Ball had been leasing land from Burby for cattle grazing since he was 19 and had worked for him over the years mending fences and haying to help support his family.In his ruling, Queen’s Bench Justice William Tilleman said John Burby loved the ranch he was born on in 1924 and had a long history of being generous with neighbours and the community.The judge said evidence from friends shows that Burby was aware of what he was doing and was happy with the deal.“John wanted the lands to go to someone who would continue the ranching tradition that he held so dear,” Tilleman wrote in a ruling released Monday.“I specifically find this meant more to him than the fact that he could make more money if he sold the land to someone else. John reasoned out his decision and believed that the Balls’ future plans for the ranch were aligned with his own.”Tilleman said the remorse of the seller’s family was not grounds to set aside the transaction.“The law has long recognized the importance of respecting an individual’s right to self-determination, including an elderly person’s right to dispose of their own property,” he wrote.Court documents show Brian Burby filed the lawsuit shortly after he became his brother’s co-guardian in 2012.John Burby moved away from his ranch to live in a seniors home in Midnapore, Alta., when he could no longer look after himself. He died there on April 28 at the age of 93.His obituary notes that his grandparents homesteaded the ranch in 1907 and that he was known for his community-mindedness, ability with horses and for raising above-average cattle.— By John Cotter in Edmonton
MONTREAL — Quebec high school students are criticizing a question on a government-administered French exam that asked them if society can adapt to the effects of climate change.Seventeen-year-old group founder Francis Claude says the way the question was phrased suggests the government has accepted climate change, when what young people want is concrete action to fight it.A Facebook group dedicated to last week’s Grade 11 ministry exam has since grown to almost 37,000 members, with many of them using memes and photos to denounce what they see as government inaction on environmental issues.Education Minister Jean-Francois Roberge reacted on Twitter last week, saying it would have been better had the exam asked students how to fight climate change, rather than how to adapt to it.He also told the legislature that it’s a positive sign to see so many young people ready to mobilize around such an important issue.The controversy comes as tens of thousands of students across Quebec and Canada have been staging demonstrations and school strikes in recent months as part of a global youth-led movement to demand action on environmental issues. The Canadian Press