Ezequiel Lavezzi Argentina Jersey kcwlva5l

sei8tron3

Deonarine Sookram, trading under the name A. Sookram & Sons General Contractors, has sued Rusal Bauxite Company claiming in excess of $100 million in damages for the breach of a contract.According to reports, Sookram’s company is, and was at all material times, a contractor engaged in the business of, inter alia,Toronto FC Jersey, providing mining and transportation equipment, operators and services to the mining industry in Guyana.It is also the owner of various mining equipment, machinery and vehicles.Rusal, a limited liability company, duly incorporated and registered under the laws of Guyana, is one of the largest miners and producers of bauxite in Guyana.On November 23, 2007, Sookram and the bauxite company entered into a written contract whereby the Plaintiff was engaged to strip and remove bauxite overburden at the Defendant’s mining operations at its West Pit deposit located at Aroaima, Berbice River.The contract was valid until December 31, 2008 and under that contract the Plaintiff was responsible for the provision and maintenance of excavators, hauler trucks, dump trucks, fuel trucks and dozers,Virgil van Dijk Netherland Jersey, and the employment of the drivers/operators thereof.In pursuance of the contract and with the knowledge and encouragement of the Defendant,Andreas Pereira Jersey, Sookram claims to the court that he invested in excess of US$1.6 million in acquiring suitable vehicles and equipment.Those included, the document stated, three 773 Caterpillar Trucks costing US$870,000, two Payhauler Trucks worth US$50,000, one WA 600 Komatsu Front-end Loader worth US$174,000, one 345 Caterpillar Excavator worth US$174,Tonny Vilhena Netherland Jersey,000, one 650 Komatsu Excavator worth US$290,Ashtone Morgan Toronto Jersey,000, one EFR Fuel Truck – US$45,000 and one Toyota Minibus -US$10,732.However,Karim Rekik Netherland Jersey, some time last March, the two parties began negotiations for a new contract and it was agreed that the new contract would supersede the existing one. Negotiations were later completed and a draft contract was sent to Moscow, Russia, for approval.Sookram contends that the bauxite company failed, refused, omitted and/or neglected to approve and enter into the new contract that was negotiated to supersede the contract dated 23rd November, 2007.And, in breach of the contract, dated the November 23 last year, the bauxite company instructed Sookram to cease all works at the West Pit deposit on the July 1, 2008; to relocate their vehicles, equipment, machinery and operators to a new location, Bissaruni,Bruno Martins Indi Netherland Jersey, in anticipation of approval of the new contract and requested to rent certain of Sookram’s vehicles, equipment and machinery on an hourly basis.Sookram claims that as a result of the defendant’s breach, his company suffered loss and damage.Sookram is being represented by Attorney-at-Law Anil Nandlall.