Govt Wants JURA Energy Ownership Change Regularized

Meanwhile, the Petroleum Division has asked the Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) of the federal cabinet to decide whether to cancel petroleum rights held by two firms after a 73.3 percent change in ownership of their ultimate parent, or allow the transaction to.

Key points

• The Petroleum Division has challenged that interpretation, citing Rule 69(d) of the 2001 petroleum rules.
• The dispute arose after IDL Investments Limited acquired a 73.3 percent stake in JURA Energy Corporation, the Canadian-listed ultimate parent of SEPL and FHL.
• Add ProPakistani to Preferred Sources and see more of our stories in Google Search and Top Stories.
• The matter involves Spud Energy Pty Limited (SEPL) and Frontier Holdings Limited (FHL).
• Add as a preferredSource on Google Follow on Google News Join WhatsApp.

In practice, the matter involves Spud Energy Pty Limited (SEPL) and Frontier Holdings Limited (FHL). It hold petroleum rights in Pakistan.

Notably, the Petroleum Division has presented two options to the ECC. The administration could revoke the businesses' petroleum rights over the ownership change carried out without prior approval, or allow the transaction to be regularized after issuing a warning to the firms. ECC Approves Extra Rs. 3 Billion to Purchase More Bulletproof Cars.

For context, the division has backed the second option, arguing that the transaction occurred at the ultimate-parent level rather than directly in SEPL or FHL. According to It additionally, existing petroleum rules do not clearly prohibit such transactions at the ultimate-parent level.

For context, the dispute arose after IDL Investments Limited acquired a 73.3 percent stake in JURA Energy Corporation, the Canadian-listed ultimate parent of SEPL and FHL.

Notably, the Petroleum Division is examining whether the acquisition changed effective control of JURA and, indirectly, the two Pakistani firms holding petroleum rights.

Meanwhile, the firms had earlier received show-cause notices over the transaction. They argued that the relevant petroleum rules apply to changes in ownership or control at the petroleum-right holder or parent level, rather than transactions involving an ultimate parent.

Meanwhile, the Petroleum Division has challenged that interpretation, citing Rule 69(d) of the 2001 petroleum rules. It refers to the share capital of a rights holder or its parent firm.

Notably, the division additionally pointed to a 2012 case in which prior approval was obtained for a change in management and control of FHL at the parent level.

In practice, the Law Division has advised that the matter should be assessed separately for each petroleum block since different regulatory regimes may apply. It remarked prior administration consent is required where a share transfer results in a change in effective control, subject to the rules governing the relevant block.

In practice, the Petroleum Division has cautioned that cancellation of the petroleum rights could have serious consequences, including feasible international arbitration. Stay Connected with ProPakistani.

Obtain the latest business news, market insights, and economic updates wherever you prefer. Follow on Google Discover.

For now, govt Wants JURA Energy Ownership Change Regularized remains the part of the story worth watching, and further updates are likely as more details are confirmed.