17 May 2020 SDK to PGS ASA, Duensing – Kippen, and Watson Farley & Williams

from:	Steven Kalavity
to:	[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Carl Richards <[email protected]>, GDPR <[email protected]>, John Francas <[email protected]>, Tippaya Moonmanee <[email protected]>
date:	May 17, 2020, 8:47 PM
subject:	Another Request for PGS ASA Sponsored Thailand Legal Claims against SDK

Another Request for PGS ASA Sponsored Thailand Legal Claims against SDK

PGS ASA / John Francas,

I continue to await delivery of the PGS ASA sponsored criminal and civil claims which were processed and delivered through Duensing – Kippen, a law firm practicing in the Kingdom of Thailand, which have caused so much trauma and damage to my reputation and the health and welfare of SDKs family.

As recently as 23 April 2020, PGS ASA sent an e-mail stating that SDK was in breach of the 11 November 2018 Compromise Agreement which was signed under threat of criminal and civil prosecution in Thailand.  PGS ASA has claimed that an arrest warrant has been issued for SDK that impedes his safe travels in and out of the Kingdom of Thailand. 

PGS ASA and the contract advisors, Watson Farley & Williams, refuse to clarify the status of the two contracts between SDK and PGS ASA UK subsidiary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited.  However, the processing of SDK personal data to forward claims in Thailand that are intended to harm SDK constitute a material breach by PGS ASA of the Confidentiality terms and conditions of the 5 December 2013 termination settlement contract (the “Settlement Contract”), Clause 9.7.

Also, PGS ASA not acting on the Confidentiality Clauses relevant to the 2010 employment contract, as described in section 2.9 Confidentiality of the PGS UK Office Personnel Handbook (v. 01/2013) (the “Handbook”) constitute a material breach in fiduciary duty by directors and secretary of PGS Exploration (UK) Limited.  Failure by directors and secretary to invoke the terms and conditions within section 2.9 in a timely manner caused significant damage to the reputation and value of PGS ASA. 

PGS Exploration (UK) Limited directors and secretary also were in breach of their fiduciary responsibilities in their not abiding by Handbook procedures in processing SDKs legal right to submit a grievance, w SDKs and his family health and safety at risks through not following policy, not abiding by policy in dealing with claims of harassment, bullying, and discrimination and ignoring employee stress due to a toxic workplace, thus abdicating their Duty of Care responsibilities to provide a safe and healthful work environment.  PGS ASA also intentionally deceived UK Border Agency with regard to their legal sponsorship responsibilities of a Tier 2 visa holder and his dependent family members.

PGS ASA Compliance have also breached their responsibilities through not responding to numerous bona fide whistleblowing complaints since the signing of the unwarranted and illegally supported Settlement Contract.  PGS ASA has breached their legal responsibilities by perverting the course of justice and mishandling such complaints.  PGS ASA and their legal counsel denied SDK his rights under English law and contract.  PGS ASA also denied SDK his legal right to see and correct personal data being processed in his name.  In fact, on 4 December 2013, during “without prejudice” discussions, SDK stated as a condition for signing the Settlement Contract being assured that data was true and accurate.  PGS ASA and Watson Farley & Williams misrepresented SDKs legal right under the UK Data Protection Act 1998 to correct personal data to see and correct his personal data.  PGS ASA stated that it was their data and would not alter nor redact any of it.

Most of the publications that PGS ASA seeks to have unpublished relate to the personal data that PGS ASA processed to support the Settlement Contract.  Following SDK submission of a subject access request citing the UK Data Protection Act, he learned of the deceit that transpired during the negotiations from 1 November 2013 – 4 December 2013.  Again, SDK requested that PGS ASA correct his personal data.  However, following several complaints, PGS ASA sent a letter addressing certain of SDKs concerns and stated that PGS ASA would alter SDK personal data through the inclusion of a 5 December 2014 e-mail sent to PGS ASA describing the several defamatory and false documents PGS ASA was processing as SDKs personal data.  This PGS ASA alteration of SDK data to include the 5 December 2014 SDK e-mail is an acknowledgement that PGS ASA, Watson Farley & Williams, and even SDKs “legal” counsel, LZW Law, knowingly misrepresented the integrity of SDKs personal being processed to support the Settlement Contract.  In other words, there was a conspiracy to defraud the victim of workplace discrimination and abuse to illegally terminate his employment under false pretenses uttering forged defamatory documents.  PGS ASA Board of Directors and Compliance were completely vested in all of these violent and illegal actions against an employee who acted on his legal right by law and contract to submit a workplace grievance (20 September 2013 grievance referenced in the Settlement Contract, Clause 5.5).

PGS ASA breached the 2010 employment contract and then used a fraudulent Settlement Contract to escape accountability for their multiple breaches in fiduciary duty.  Since the publication of the 2013 PGS ASA Responsibility Report and their joining the UN Global Compact, PGS ASA has engaged in a deceptive disinformation campaign to avoid invoking the Confidentiality terms and conditions and instead pervert the course of justice and continue their violent fraud and defamation of a whistleblower, again acting under his rights under by contract governed by the laws of England, but also the laws of Norway that should have guided all decisions and actions taken against SDK. 

It is incumbent upon PGS ASA to address all published allegations and provide their side of the dispute for all stakeholders to evaluate under the laws of Norway and England first and then explain the criminal defamation claims filed in Thailand against a whistleblower.  It is the duty of PGS ASA and PGS Exploration (UK) Limited directors and secretary.  PGS ASA is beholden to carry out their fiduciary duty and behave ethically and in accordance to the laws, values, and code of conduct which forms PGS ASA promises and commitments to shareholders, customers, and employees. 

Regards,

SDK

###