15375 Memorial Dr, Ste. 100, Houston, TX, 77049-4138
PGS Exploration (UK) Limited [PGSUK] Bypassed / Breached contractual commitments governed by the Laws of England. PGS ASA /PGSUK has NEVER TAKEN ANY ACTION on a civil breach of contractual confidentiality terms and conditions that provide parties with avenues of redress for disparaging publications. These contracts are governed by the Laws of England that provide WHISTLEBLOWER protections through the Public Interests Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA). As Late as 16 July 2018, PGS ASA / PGSUK referenced terms and conditions of a termination settlement contract signed 5 December 2013 between PGSUK and SDK, yet never cited specific breaches. Instead, PGS ASA took action using the Thai Criminal Justice system in September 2018?
Original Employment Contract, 27 September 2010, Governed by the Laws of England, References Confidentiality Terms to Protect PGS ASA from DisparagingPublications
Termination Settlement Contract Signed 5 December 2013
2018 GDPR Subject Access Request (SAR) Refusal to Respond
The 2018 SAR that SDK submitted requested PGS ASA comment regarding any processing with regard to my publications AFTER THE 2014 SAR. The response by PGS ASA / PGS UK Head of Legal, John Francas, on behalf of PGS ASA, misrepresents PGS and SDK data protection history. Another SAR was submitted in 2016 through PGS ASA Compliance. Rune O Pedersen was PGS ASA General Counsel at the time. Pedersen was provided with several published whistleblowing articles which also claimed PGS ASA executive and board of directors non-compliant and criminal behavior. These e-mails were forwarded to PGS ASA Data Protection Officer, Daphne Bjerke,with the 2018 SAR for consideration.
PGS ASA continued to contend that the 5 December 2013 termination settlement contract (TSC) is still valid as late as 16 July 2018. Many of my articles had contended that the TSC was a fraudulent instrument supported by forged documents. In September 2018, less than two (2) months later and over three (3) years after my first online published whistleblowing post, PGS decides to forward a claim citing Thai criminal law? How can the data subject and former employee notbe in breach of the TSC but be in violation of criminal defamation in Thailand?
PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (England) Company Directors and Head of Legal’s Selected Contract Jurisdictions are both the Kingdom of Thailand and Harris County, Texas, USA. Not England?