Severance Agreement Pdf: Fill & Download for Free

Shocking, but true!Claude Arpi in his book “Born In Sin: The Panchsheel Agreement – The sacrifice of Tibet” and in Tibet: The Last Months of a Free Nation, has written extensively about this.Communist China had started invasion of Tibet in 1950, and after they made the Tibetans sign the infamous ’17-Point Agreement’ in gunpoint, several thousands PLA troops entered Lhasa in September 1951. During the next months, they were followed by 20,000 PLA soldiers who started occupying strategic points on the Tibetan plateau. With this, started the first real test of the ’17-Point Agreement’ and its promise of peaceful co-existence of the Chinese occupation forces and the Tibetan government. It was the availability of food, because induction of large PLA troops caused an unprecedented breakdown of Tibetan economy.https://tibet.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/FACTS-ABOUT-17-POINT-AGREEMENT..pdfThis is when Indian government started supplying rice to the Chinese troops stationed in Tibet! Before Chinese PLA entered Tibet, very few Tibetans had ever eaten rice, Tsampa (roast barley) being their staple food for centuries. Surely Indian government could have guessed that the rice they were supplying was for the Chinese PLA?For centuries Tibet had practiced sustainable development and had been self-sufficient in food grain. Famine was unheard of in Tibet. But due to the large occupation forces food-grain supply came to a complete breakdown. The Tibetan prime minister of that time, Lukhangwa, an upright person, had strongly protested this severe stress on Tibetan agriculture. Following his resistance, Chinese PLA forced his sacking. However, the unbearable pressure on Tibetan agriculture had to be relieved. Transporting rice from Chinese mainland to Tibet was a tremendously tall ask, considering the transportation problems prevailing in Tibet.At this point China requested food from India. However back then, India had very serious problems of food grain supply and Jawaharlal Nehru’s government had to import food grain. China agreed to supply food grain to India. However, in return, India was required to supply to Chinese PLA in Tibet.It is nothing short of tragedy that the two greatest influences on Nehru at this crucial juncture in history were Krishna Menon and K.M. Panikkar, both communists. Panikkar, while nominally serving as Indian ambassador in China, became practically a spokesman for Chinese interests in Tibet. Sardar Patel once remarked that Panikkar “has been at great pains to find an explanation or justification for Chinese policy and actions.”In 1952, India’s ambassador to China, Panikkar, agreed to Zhou Enlai’s request of transportation of food supplies to Tibet via Calcutta (now Kolkata). On May 24th, 1952, Nehru specifically agreed to India supplying 2,500 tons of rice to PLA, and communicated his decision to India’s ambassador to China, Panikkar. Indian government, keen on cementing friendship with communist China, had completely ignored principles and common sense, in agreeing to supply rice to an invading army. So much for Nehru’s resistance to imperialism and message of peace!The rice had to be supplied via Sikkim. When the deal was finally concluded, a senior Chinese officer had to be posted in Gangtok to oversee the trans-shipment through the Chumbi valley. This was a strategically important place, and intelligence collection later helped in PLA’s aggression against India in 1962.Neither was this arrangement one-time. India started supplying rice to Chinese PLA in 1952. This continued through 1953 and 1954. This is in spite of Nehru explaining his policy a press conference in 1952, and announcing this as an Ad Hoc arrangement only. In 1953, India supplied 1,000 tons of rice to Chinese PLA in Tibet. At the height of this lunacy, India announced on 20th October 1954 that although China had enough rice, Indian had decided to supply rice again to the PLA stationed in Tibet.This same PLA had brutally crushed the Tibetans. This same PLA had built the infamous road connecting Tibet and Xinjiang, through Aksai Chin, which was opened in 1957. This same PLA had built roads up to Indian borders, which was later used by them to invade India in 1962. Indian government was feeding the enemy that was busy crushing India’s friends and preparing to invade India!That’s why when China went to war with India in 1962, it has been portrayed as the “Great Chinese Betrayal”—“a stab in the back”, as Jawaharlal Nehru would say with much pain and anguish.

Roksana, my best advice to you is that you change your mindset from that of paying money to obtain New Zealand citizenship. This change in mindset will protect you from harm and disappointment in many ways.Understand that the intention of the New Zealand Government is to accept applications for citizenship from people who promise or who have proven that they can make a significant and positive contribution to New Zealand society. In order to objectively assess the merit of the many applications the New Zealand Government receives it uses a number of criteria amongst which is the promise of beneficial investment. You need to understand that if you attempt to obtain citizenship by this means that you will be monitored by the New Zealand Government and your promise will be enforced.The other manner in which you will save yourself harm in understanding that New Zealand Citizenship cannot be bought is that you should pay no money except to a legitimate official government agency to whom you owe fees. If any individual asks for money or promises you citizenship in exchange for money you are being made a false promise. No individual has the power to grant you citizenship excepting the Minister of Immigration who can grant special dispensations. Nor think that you can bribe individuals to get what you want in New Zealand. That is not to say that there are no corrupt individuals in New Zealand but there is a good chance that the system will detect such corruption in which case prison awaits and any chance you might have of obtaining citizenship will evaporate forever. There has been recently a significant number of foreign students laying complaint against the New Zealand authorities that on completion of an educational course the students cannot get the residency they were promised by people who took money from them (particularly in India) on the basis of promises that they had no authority to make on behalf of the New Zealand government. The New Zealand Government will not be held accountable for your stupidity if you succumb to these sorts of inducements to hand over your money. Deal only with official New Zealand Government Agencies directly. You might not like what they tell you but at least they will not rip you off on the basis of false promises.If you think that I exaggerate please see the list of cases below where the New Zealand Government has held to account people and organisations that have not honored their investment promises.SourceURL:https://www.linz.govt.nz/overseas-investment/enforcement/enforcement-action-takenCurrent proceedingsWe currently have two proceedings before the High Court where the Office is seeking disposal and civil penalty orders for purchases of sensitive land without consent. As these matters are currently before the courts, it is not appropriate for us to provide further information at this time.Decided casesPenalties or disposal orders have been made in the following cases:Name / entityDateDetailsFFG Investment Limited and Grand Sky Limited13 December 2019The High Court ordered:FFG Investment Limited to pay a civil penalty of $82,500Grand Sky Limited to pay a civil penalty of $40,500FFG and Grand Sky together to pay $10,000 costsfor failing to obtain consent under the Overseas Investment Act 2005.News item and copy of judgementBCH InvestmentsLtd12 July 2019The High Court ordered BCH Investments Ltd to divest its interests in two properties, and pay:a civil penalty of $300,000account taker’s costs of $260,282.68legal costs of $27,763.50for failing to obtain consent under the Overseas Investment Act 2005.The sale of the properties must occur within 2 years, with leave reserved to Land Information New Zealand to seek further orders under s47 of the Act if the divestment has not occurred within that time.View a copy of the judgment (PDF 49KB)Zhongliang Hong, Xueli Ke, IRL Investment Limited, Grand Energetic Company Limited4 July 2019The High Court ordered the defendants to pay a total of $2,970,256 in civil penalties and costs for failing to obtain consent under the Overseas Investment Act 2005 for the purchase of two Auckland properties.Zhongliang Hong and Xuelie Ke were each ordered to pay a penalty of $307,500 and $10,000 to the Overseas Investment Office as a contribution to its costs.IRL Investment Limited was ordered to pay $2,335,256 in gains from the sale of one property.Grand Energetic Company Limited was ordered to sell the other property.Oral judgment delivered 4 July 2019.Read the settlement agreement (PDF 2MB)Read the judgment (PDF 65KB)Agria (Singapore) PTE Ltd (part ofAgria Corporation) and Mr Alan Lai21 March 2019The High Court imposed civil penalties for breach of good character conditions that attached to conditions of Agria's consent to invest in PGG Wrightson, namely:Agria $100,000 in civil penaltiesMr Lai $120,00 in civil penaltiesAgria and Mr Lai were ordered to pay $30,000 to the Overseas Investment Office as a contribution to its costs.Note that the High Court decision followed a settlement entered into between the parties – refer to extract in “Settlement” section below.Read the judgment (PDF 103KB)Read the news itemWenbing TangXianghua Huang, Binghan ZhouBinzhi Ouyang12 March 2018The High Court ordered the defendants pay a total of $847,000 in civil penalties and costs for failing to get consent under the Overseas Investment Office before buying a property.Wenbing Tang was penalised $110,000The other three defendants received a penalty based on the gain they otherwise stood to make from disposing of the property.Read the judgmentRead the news itemCarbon Conscious New Zealand LimitedFiled – 2015Judgment – 4 April 2016Carbon Conscious was ordered by the High Court to pay a civil penalty after using an associate to purchase sensitive land on its behalf.Read the judgment (PDF 121KB)Read the news itemDisposal of propertyName / entityDate of disposalDetailsOverseas Investors (names withheld pending sale)ForthcomingOverseas investors acquired approximately 36.72 ha of sensitive land in the Auckland area without consent. The investors have been required to dispose of the land by 10 February 2021. Further details will be released when appropriate.Overseas Investors (names withheld pending sale)ForthcomingA property is currently for sale in the Helensville area. Overseas investors acquired approximately 13 hectares of land without consent. The investors have been issued with a notice under Section 41F of the Overseas Investment Act 2005. Further details will be revealed when they become available.Kingstown Blue Spring Resort Limited (formerly Kingstown Volcano Springs Limited)ForthcomingIn July 2014, KBSR was granted consent to acquire the Okoroire Hot Springs Hotel on 27 hectares of sensitive land at 18 Somerville Road, Okoroire. KBSR’s consent conditions required it to implement the developments described in its Business Plan by 17 August 2018. KBSR did not do so and the OIO has now required it to dispose of the property in accordance with a disposal framework set out in its consent conditions. Further details will be released when appropriate.Read the news itemMichael Rems and Julie O’Shea20 December 2018Rems and O’Shea (American investors) were granted consent in 2015 to acquire approximately 0.5 hectares of sensitive land on Waiheke Island. Consent conditions required the couple to become ordinarily resident in New Zealand within three years. They did not do so and consequently we required them to dispose of the property – which they have now done.Pukaki Garden Ltd, Twizel Development Ltd and Lake Pukaki Development LtdJune 2019, February 2020 and forthcomingOverseas Investors acquired three properties totalling 326.993 ha of sensitive land in the Twizel area without consent. A settlement agreement has been entered. Two properties have been sold. The current date for the third property to be sold is by 9 July 2021. Details of the sale will be released when available.Flying Class Limited20 September 2018Flying Class Ltd acquired approximately 5.7728 hectares of sensitive land near Matamata (a horse stabling facility). Consent conditions required it to complete certain development works. However, it did not complete all of those works and was required to dispose of the property. Flying Class has now disposed of the property.Tui Estate LimitedForthcomingProperty is currently for sale.Overseas investors acquired approximately 67.9481 hectares of land in Rakaia Gorge, Canterbury. Consent conditions required the consent holder to develop homes on the land. The consent holder has not done this, and the land is therefore to be sold.Waiheke Island Airpark Resort Limited5 December 2018Conditions of consent required the consent holder to develop Waiheke Island airfield (8.9580 hectares) and to dispose of the airfield if it was not developed.As the property had not been developed, the consent holder has disposed of the property.Canres Limited26 July 2019Conditions of consent required the consent holder to develop a recreational and sport lodge business on the property (40 hectares) and to dispose of the property if it was not developed.As the conditions have not been met, the property has been sold.MTS Energy Limited27 July 2018Overseas investors acquired approximately 0.5 hectares of land in Northcote, Auckland without OIO consent.OIO consent was required because the land is sensitive land (greater than 0.4 hectares and adjoins a recreation reserve).The OIO entered into a settlement agreement with the overseas investors on 9 November 2017 for the land to be sold.The property has been disposed of.Sino-NZ Tourism Development LimitedJuly 2018Overseas investors acquired over 5 hectares of land near to Flatbush, Auckland without consent. OIO consent was required because the land is sensitive as it is over 5 hectares in a non-urban area. The consent holder has disposed of the property.Terrior Winery Fund2017Mr Charles Banks, the majority shareholder of Terrior Capital LLC, which manages Terrior Winery Fund, has been sentenced to four years imprisonment for fraud in the United States.Conditions of consent require the 'individuals with control' of the Terrior Winery Fund to remain of good character. In light of Mr Banks' conviction and sentence, we consider that Mr Banks is not of good character.Mr Banks has resigned as director of Trinity Hill Limited and is being removed from having any interest in Terrior's New Zealand investments.Whisper Creek Golf Resort Limited (previously Christchurch Golf Resort Limited)Aug-17Oct-17Conditions of consent required the consent holder to develop a golf resort but it has not done this. The consent holder has disposed of the property.Silver Fern International Travel & Trade LimitedOct-16Feb-17Conditions of consent required Silver Fern to develop an accommodation business on the property and to dispose of the property if it did not.The consent holder did not meet the conditions of consent and was required to sell the property.Nirvana Capital LimitedApr-16Conditions of consent required two of the shareholders of Nirvana Capital Limited to become ordinarily resident in New Zealand and to dispose of the property if they did not.Due to failure to meet the conditions of consent, the consent holder sold the property.Mikhail KhimichDec-15Conditions of consent required Mr Khimich to develop an organic winery on the property and to dispose of the property if the winery was not developed.SettlementName / entityDateDetailsCRV Limited and Animal Breeding Services (2007) LimitedJanuary 2020Settlement requiring CRV and ABS to divest of a leasehold interest in sensitive land and apply for retrospective consent for second leasehold interest, each acquired without obtaining consent under the Overseas Investment Act 2005. A warning letter has also been issued for related breaches – see below.CRV Limited and Animal Breeding Services (2007) Limited - settlement agreement (PDF 922KB)JBS Australia Pty LimitedOctober 2019Settlement related to an investigation into JBS Australia’s requirement for individuals with control to remain of good character under conditions of JBS Australia’s investment in Scott Technology Limited (Scott).The Overseas Investment Act Office (OIO) has settled its investigation into JBS Australia following possible links to a Brazilian corruption scandal.The OIO has concluded that the individuals linked to the corruption scandal (Joesley and Wesley Batista) are not exercising control over JBS Australia and its investment in Scott.The OIO is also satisfied that the Brazilian corruption scandal occurred offshore and that New Zealand investors were not put at risk.If Joesley and Wesley Batista assume any control over JBS Australia in the future, the OIO may take stricter measures and JBS Australia may be required to sell its investment in Scott.JBS Australia Pty Limitedsettlement agreement (PDF 4MB)Agria (Singapore) PTE Ltd (part ofAgria Corporation) and Mr Alan LaiDecember 2018Agria and Mr Lai agreed that:the fact of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations and settlements are matters that reflect adversely on the fitness of Mr Lai in relation to Agria’s investment in PGG Wrightsonconsequently Mr Lai and Agria failed to meet the conditions of consent to invest in PGG Wrightson.As a result Agria and Mr Lai agreed to:recommend to the High Court that civil penalties should be imposedAgria Singapore is to reduce its shareholding from 50.22% in PGG Wrightson to below 50%Mr Lai to be prevented from being Chair or director of PGG Wrightson for 5 yearsuse best endeavours to ensure Joo Hai Lee resign as a Chairperson of PGG Wrightson by mid-2019contribution of $30,000 to OIO costs.Read a copy of the settlement agreement (PDF 15MB).Forest Growth Holdings Ltd (FGHL)July 2018The settlement related to FGHL’s role in the transaction described in the New Forest entry below.Read a copy of the settlement agreement (PDF 2MB)Read the warning issued to FGHL in the Warnings section belowNew Forests Asset Management Pty Limited (New Forests) andWairarapa Estate Limited (WEL)October 2016The settlement relates to an arrangement between New Forests (through WEL, a company managed by New Forests) and Forest Growth Holdings Limited (FGHL), whereby FGHL – a New Zealand company – would purchase small blocks of forestry land to amalgamate and then on-sell to New Forests – an overseas company. In entering into this arrangement, FGHL was effectively acting as New Forests’ associate.The transactions involved forestry land in the Wairarapa and took place in accordance with a term sheet the parties had agreed to.The arrangement meant that New Forests could buy the amalgamated land from FGHL at an expected price and seek consent later once it had the certainty of being able to buy from FGHL and for fewer transactions than it would otherwise have needed to apply for.The parties entered into the arrangement on the basis of legal advice and in the belief they were complying with the overseas investment rules.Read a copy of the settlement agreement (PDF 2MB)Read a copy of the warning issued to the parties in the Warning section belowUdo LammertingDr Kristin LammertingLIG Lammerting Investment Group (NZ) Limited]April 2018Settlement related to the acquisition of several properties in the Northland region which were investigated by the OIO.Details of the settlement agreement will be released once key steps under the agreement have been undertaken.Andrew TurneyPaul TurneyWendy TurneySchooner Agribusiness LLCMay 2015Settlement related to two of six farming established by the late Alan Hubbard that were investigated by the OIO and resulted in the disposal of sensitive land acquired without consent. The other four syndicates had disbanded by this date and the properties had already been sold.The overseas investors in the two syndicates paid $150,400 to charity and OIO’s costs.Read the news itemAdministrative penaltiesPenalties for retrospective consentsThe OIO can grant consent for an investment retrospectively where an investor inadvertently break the rules. The OIO has provided guidance outlining when a retrospective consent may be appropriate and the factors we take into account in setting the administrative penalty for a retrospective consents.Read the OIO guidance on retrospective consentsFrom 1 July 2017 any penalties imposed for retrospective consents is included on the decision summary issued when consent is granted.Penalties for late provision of informationPrompt and accurate provision of information is key to our ability to detect and take action on breaches of the rules and to effectively monitor whether investors have met conditions imposed on consents.We impose penalties for the late provision for information or documentation.Financial yearNumber of penalties issued for late reporting2017/201832018/201972019/20203Names of repeat non-compliers may be published.WarningsThe following warnings have been issued by the Overseas Investment Office since 2015:NameDateDetailsCRV Limited and Animal Breeding Services (2007) LimitedJanuary 2020Warning for directly and indirectly acquiring interests in sensitive land without obtaining consent. The land is no longer owned by CRV or ABS.CRV Limited and Animal Breeding Services (2007) Limited - warning letter (PDF 2MB)Roger Dickie18 December 2019Warning to Mr Dickie that his company breached the Overseas Investment Act 2005. The breach occurred when Roger Dickie Hadleigh Limited entered an agreement for sale and purchase of sensitive land on behalf of an overseas investor in May 2018. The Overseas Investment Office consider he was acting as an associate of the overseas person and that he therefore required the consent of the Overseas Investment Office. He is warned that any future conduct of this kind may result in the Overseas Investment Office taking proceedings against him.Read the warning (PDF 190KB)Min Jia13 September 2018Warning for acquiring an interest in shares in companies which own sensitive land without consent in 2014 and 2015.Read the warning (PDF 191KB)New Forests Asset Management Pty Limited (New Forests), Wairarapa Estate Limited (WEL) and Forest Growth Holdings Ltd (FGHL)13 July 2018Warning around acquiring sensitive land without prior consent by using a New Zealand associate to allow amalgamation of land and delay the need for consent.Read the warning (New Forests, WEL and FGHL) (PDF 832KB)Russell Mawhinney8 September 2017Warning in relation to incorrect legal advice given to overseas persons.Read the warning (PDF 182KB)Read the OIO's report (PDF 397KB)Itoham Yonekyu Holdings Inc28 July 2017A warning for obtaining an interest in sensitive assets, on 1 April 2016, without consent.Read the warning (PDF 1MB)Southern Paprika Limited15 December 2016Warning for acquiring sensitive land without consent in 2005Read the warning (PDF 131KB)Harbour Edge Avocados Limited and Southern Paprika Limited15 December 2016Warning for acquiring sensitive land without consent in 2015. (The matter was also subject to a retrospective application for consent.)Read the warning (HEAL) (PDF 122KB)Read the warning (SPL) (PDF 131KB)Rafael and Federico GrozovskyCeol and Muir Inc28 September 2016Warning that information provided to the OIO must be complete and accurate and no material omissions should exist in relation to good character checks.Read the warning (Rafael and Federico Grozovsky) (PDF 194KB)Read the warning (Ceol and Muir Inc) (PDF 185KB)I-Lun Chien12 December 2015Warning in relation to a false statement made to the OIO.Read the warning (PDF 118KB)Contact Energy Limited8 June 2015Warning in relation to acquisition of an interest in two relatively small areas of sensitive land without consent in 2011 and 2014. The land was no longer owned by Contact Energy.Read the warning (PDF 297KB)Referral complaint to professional societyWe can refer a person to a professional conduct body in relation to a breach of the Overseas Investment Rules.Name / entityDate of referral and to which professional societyDetailsIn relation to Carbon Conscious New Zealand LimitedDecember 2017 – New Zealand Law SocietyCarbon Conscious New Zealand Limited obtained legal advice on the conduct of its business in New Zealand, including the acquisition of land.On the basis of that, Carbon Conscious New Zealand Limited breached the Overseas Investment Act 2005 which resulted in it paying a penalty.

Let's look at the real cause of the current conflict, as the question asks.So to do that, let's see what the 52% actually voted for. And that's easy because all the Leave promises have been collated into a single document, thus:Brexit as Explained by Leave in 2016.pdfFor a start, voters were told by the Leave campaign that the UK will get “a free trade agreement that continued to give access to UK goods and services on the European Union”. That was “what it was all about”.People were told “the Lisbon Treaty legally obliges the EU to negotiate a free trade agreement”.People were also told, the UK “were guaranteed a trade deal”.So the message was that the UK “would have 'full access' to the Single Market but be free from the regulation”. Maintaining access to the European Markets, and increasing access to markets around the world, was really much of the argument for Leave. Implicitly, the Leave campaign promised that Brexit would be a better deal than the one Britain has at the moment and that the UK can decide the terms of trade after Brexit.And people voted accordingly.The people who did not vote Leave were then horrified (as are many Leave voters) to now find out the Brexit is now all about No Deal; ie. no trade agreement with the EU.Many people are not so stupid as to not recognise that Brexit is primarily an economic project, not an exercise in ensuring that some people can continue to avoid paying their taxes. Now not only is there a strong probability of No Deal, but there are no signs that other countries around the world even want to maintain past levels of trade with the UK.Brexit: UK has rolled over just £16bn out of £117bn trade dealsAs there are many millions of UK citizens who are intimately affected by No Deal Brexit, they are entitled to feel anger, perhaps even severe outrage, that they have been blatantly lied to, by people with no responsibility, no strategy and no concern for the damage they are willing to inflict on ordinary people in the UK. Everyone in charge of Brexit since it began are paragons of incompetence.Why are people still intent on Brexit even though there is still no burden of proof that Brexit is a worthwhile course for the UK? Why are the real reasons for Brexit still so opaque that nobody can even offer a paper detailing the benefits of Brexit even after over 3 years? Does that not puzzle you?Anyway, here are some suggestions for the reasons for Brexit:How tenable are the claims of Phillip Hammond that Johnson is backed by speculators who have bet billions on hard Brexit?If a no deal Brexit is forecasted to create such calamitous financial scenarios, why is Boris Johnson so hellbent on delivering it?And following are just recent examples (out of many) of government incompetence:What do you think about Savid Javid's statement about how the spending after Brexit will be funded?Why does Boris Johnson call the EU to compromise on what is a deal negotiated between himself, the ERG and the DUP?And in case you are wondering:Why is "Leave Means Leave" considered as a justification for Brexit?Thanks for a conflicting A2A, Joan Wall