In view of the falsehood of the notes and making use of the right of reply, I state that the truth is that in 2003, the company San Pedro Resources signed a mining contract with Mr. Martinez. In 2008 the mining company started to default on the payments and obligations of the contract. Mr. Martinez sent a letter trying to settle the matter without a favorable response from the company.
Later in 2011, Mr. Martinez notified them of the termination of the contract for non-compliance. The mining company was the first to sue by requesting to a judge the nullity of the notification to Mr. Martinez and the powerful mining company lost that lawsuit.
Subsequently, in 2014 Mr. Martinez sued for payment of damages to the mining company, which throughout the trial has had the services of 2 large law firms from the capital of the country as its representative lawyers who even lost procedural opportunities due to lack of attention to the trial, in contrast, Mr . Martinez has had only one lawyer from Torreon during the entire process.
In the evidentiary phase, Mr. Martinez offered 23 documents, confessional, testimonial, inspection and expert evidence in medicine, accounting and mining, having presented all his evidence. While the mining company only offered one document and one confessional evidence that was not presented because its lawyers did not prepare it. That is the real reason why in 2015 a judgment was rendered in favor of Mr. Martinez.
It took many years, multiple appeals and injunctions for the judgment to become a res judicata and finally, in 2021, the amount to be paid was determined, which includes the damages that would have been received if the mine had worked, as the company committed itself in the contract.
The truth is that the mining company has not paid anything in 10 years and still has the mine in its possession.
Enough of the lies and baseness of the mining company that wants to dirty in the first place the image of the Mexican justice system that respected all its procedural rights when it was called to trial and was able to promote all the appeals and injunctions it wanted to drag out the matter and in second place now threatens to declare bankruptcy when they were condemned to pay in a trial where all their guarantees were respected.
The truth is that the arrogance and arrogance of the company did not let them see the seriousness of the matter that was neglected, since the company even stopped fighting some legal appeals due to the indifference of their lawyers. Now the company complains of corruption and pretends to stain the Mexican justice system and pretends to play the victim when in 10 years its directors never attended Mr. Martinez when he asked to speak with them.
Now they come to cry with baseness what they did not know how to defend with gallantry.
Comments