POORLY PREPARED SHARE AGREEMENT IN GRENADA SUSTAINABLE AQUACULTURE PROJECT SHOULD HAVE ALERTED INVESTORS

One of the Red Flags of white collar crime is a poorly prepared purchase contract. The Share [sic] Sale Agreement, by and between Grenada Sustainable Aquaculture (GSA) Limited and the investors/victims suffers from numerous errors and defects, all of which should have deterred them from placing any funds with GSA. No responsible professional would have never let such a substandard product leave his offices for a client.

Here are just some of the issues we found, in a cursory examination:

(1) Obviously, no attorney in Grenada prepared this agreement; as the spelling grammar and syntax, and punctuation, confirm that the author, at least of the original form, was American. British English spelling of words is absent. Was an attorney in Grenada even consulted to confirm that the terms conform to local law ? Doubtful.

(2) The typographical errors, grammatical mistakes, awkward nature of several sentences indicate that either there was no proofreading of the draft, or that the agreement was a hurried cut-and-paste operation not subsequently checked, and then performed by individuals without professional training and experience.

(3) No responsible lawyer would allow such shoddy work to be passed off as finished product. While the Choice of Law provision, which dictates the Laws of Grenada shall apply, was added, the failure of the drafter to make Grenada the exclusive place suit may be brought, known as a Forum Selection Clause,  was a major error.  You want all litigation arising out of this Agreement ro be handled in th courts of Grenada, so that justice is done.

Look at the typos and errors yourself; there are far too many to chalk it up to harmless error. If CBI investors all had attorneys to advise them, in advance of placing any investment capital on GSA, the number of victims would be far less.