ETGMF sues 1010 and CMKM

[Twist Capper]

By: vikilee
30 Aug 2007, 10:50 AM EDT
Msg. 597248 of 597269
Jump to msg. #

Entourage is suing CMKM for return of Entourage shares.
Alledgedly, CMKM is in breach of contract.
- - - - -


By: reality.bytes
30 Aug 2007, 11:16 AM EDT
Msg. 597264 of 597267
(This msg. is a reply to 597260 by unearthed_one.)
Jump to msg. #

On August 28, 2007, Entourage Mining Ltd (the “Company”) filed, in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim against 101047025 Saskatchewan Ltd. (“1010) and CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (CMKM) seeking to have the court set aside the October 25, 2005 Mineral Property Option and Assignment Agreements between the Company and the Defendants (collectively, the “Contracts”) among the parties and requesting that the defendants return the 45,000,000 shares (the “Shares”) paid as consideration by Entourage to consummate these agreements.

[Twist Capper]

knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?repo=tenk&ipage=5145416&doc=1&total=&back=2&g=&attach=on

[Twist Capper]

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 6-K

REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16
UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the month of August, 2007

Commission File Number: 000-50305

ENTOURAGE MINING LTD.
(Translation of registrant's name into English)

614 - 475 Howe Street
Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6C 2B3
(Address of principal executive offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.

[ X ] Form 20-F [ ] Form 40-F

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): [ ]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): [ ]

Indicate by check mark whether by furnishing the information contained in this Form, the registrant is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Yes [ ] No [ X ]

If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- _________


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SUBMITTED HEREWITH

Exhibits

99.1 Material Change Report dated August 28, 2007





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Entourage Mining Ltd.
(Registrant)

Date: August 29, 2007 By: /s/ Greg Kennedy
Greg Kennedy

Title: President



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the form of a material change report required under section 85 (1) of the Securities Act

and section 151 of the Securities Rules.




BC FORM 53-901F

(Previously Form 27)




Securities Act




MATERIAL CHANGE REPORT




Item 1: Reporting Issuer




State the full name and address of the principal office in Canada of the reporting issuer.




Entourage Mining Ltd.

Suite 614 - 475 Howe Street

Vancouver, British Columbia

V6E 2B3




Item 2: Date of Material Change




August 28, 2007




Item 3: Press Release




N/A




Item 4: Summary of Material Change




On August 28, 2007, Entourage Mining Ltd (the “Company”) filed, in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim against 101047025 Saskatchewan Ltd. (“1010) and CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (CMKM) seeking to have the court set aside the October 25, 2005 Mineral Property Option and Assignment Agreements between the Company and the Defendants (collectively, the “Contracts”) among the parties and requesting that the defendants return the 45,000,000 shares (the “Shares”) paid as consideration by Entourage to consummate these agreements.







Item 5: Full Description of Material Change




The Company claims, in its court documents, that it is now aware that the Defendants did not deliver good consideration as promised for the Shares and further that breaches of the Contracts by the Defendants constitute non-performance of the Contracts on the Defendants’ part.




The Company is seeking the following remedies under the Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim:




1) A Declaration that the Defendant 1010 has breached the 1010 contract with the Company (the “1010 Contract”);

2) A Declaration that the Defendant CMKM has breached the CMKM contract with the Company (the “CMKM Contract”);

3) A mandatory injunction directing the Defendant 1010, and any trustee or transfer agent retained by the Defendant 1010, to return to the treasury of the Plaintiff all Shares in the Plaintiff that were issued by the Plaintiff pursuant to the 1010 Contract;

4) In the alternative, damages as against the Defendants 1010 and CMKM for breach of the 1010 Contract;

5) In the alternative, damages as against the Defendants 1010 and CMKM for breach of the 1010 Contract;

6) In the alternative, damages as against the Defendant CMKM for breach of the CMKM Contract;

7) Costs of these proceedings;

8) If applicable, interest pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act; and

9) Such further and other relief which to this Honourable Court seems just and equitable.




Item 6: Reliance on section 85 (2) of the Act




The Report is not being filed on a confidential basis.




Item 7: Omitted Information




N/A




Item 8: Senior Officers




Gregory F. Kennedy

President and Director

Tel: [phone]




Item 9: Statement of Senior Officer




"The foregoing accurately discloses the material change referred to herein."




Also include the date and place of making the statement.




Date: August 29, 2007, 2005




Place: Vancouver




“Gregory F. Kennedy”

_________________________

Gregory F. Kennedy, Director

[portrush]

Great. What's next?

pr

[Twist Capper]

One thing I notice is: no mention of claims reverting
back to CMKM...........

[hawkeye1]

Thanks Twistcapper very good DD I must say. Hats off to you.

[whiskeyj]

twistcapper said:

One thing I notice is: no mention of claims reverting
back to CMKM...........

<<<Item 5: Full Description of Material Change

The Company claims, in its court documents, that it is now aware that the Defendants did not deliver good consideration as promised for the Shares and further that breaches of the Contracts by the Defendants constitute non-performance of the Contracts on the Defendants’ part.>>>>

did we ever give them the claims?

[Twist Capper]

www.entouragemining.com

VANCOUVER, British Columbia, January 03, 2006 - Entourage Mining Ltd. (the "Company) (OTCBB: ETGMF) reports that it has completed the due diligence on the Smeaton/Forte a la Corne/ Green Lake properties and the Hatchet Lake properties as described in the Company's October 20, 2005 news release. The Company has informed the CMKM Taskforce and 101047025 Saskatchewan Ltd. that Entourage will instruct its transfer agent to issue the "Purchase Shares" (45 million shares to the CMKM Shareholders and 3,888,888 to 101047025 Saskatchewan Ltd.) in conjunction with the acquisition of these property options.


Furthermore, the Company is drilling the first target on the Smeaton area properties. The Company will report the findings as results become available.


VANCOUVER, CANADA, January 10, 2006 - Entourage Mining Ltd. ("Entourage" or the "Company") (OTCBB: ETGMF) is pleased to announce that it has been informed that the Operator intersected kimberlite or a closely related kimberlitic rock type on the first target in the Smeaton/Forte a la Corne diamond prospect drilling program. The Operator reported intersecting apparently re-sedimented and primary kimberlitic breccia and magmatic rocks from 162.2 meters to 270.4 meters beneath overburden, glacial till and Cretaceous sedimentary strata. The drill hole was stopped at 282.5 meters in sediments due to difficult drilling conditions

VANCOUVER, Canada (February 13, 2006) Entourage Mining Ltd. ("Entourage" or the "Company") (OTCBB:ETGMF) wishes to report on the 2006 winter diamond-drilling program being carried out in the Weirdale-Smeaton area of Saskatchewan. Ivan Young, P. Geo, and a "qualified person" as that term is defined in NI 43-101 has informed the Company that drilling on the second anomaly, D-WJ-7 has intersected kimberlite at a depth of 194.1 meters.


They claim to have had "work" done.........

[diamonds4all]

Twistcapper,

Thanks!

Is there anything Positive in this for us Bona fides?

[deeitz1969]

diamonds4all said:

Twistcapper,

Thanks!

Is there anything Positive in this for us Bona fides?

Only thing I can think of is if we are trying to trade again, defaulting on this means the claims are now CMKX (aka 1010, aka CMKM?) again. And if the holes have already been worked on then there may be some ability for valuation..... All I know is I wish this would come to an end..... positively of course...

Deeitz

[Twist Capper]

This was the line from the original ETGMF agreement:

13.2 It is an express condition of this Agreement that any dispute of its terms be brought in the courts of the Province of British Columbia. In the event that any court outside of the Province of British Columbia attempts to assert jurisdiction over the terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be terminated and the Property may, at Entourage’s election, be returned to CMKM.

- - - - - - -

This is taking place in BC......

[integrity4u]

I have no idea what this all means to us shareholders, but in the Paltalk Int'l. room today, they were all excited and said it was good news.

Tonight on Pro CMKX room (Mona's room) momike is going to lead a discussion on this topic. It starts 9 PM EDT if anyone is interested. Not saying he has all the answers, but he is a good analytical thinker and always leads a good discussion. FWIW

[shoelessjoe]

twistcapper said:

One thing I notice is: no mention of claims reverting
back to CMKM...........

tc,
I think this covers the claims

seeking to have the court set aside the October 25, 2005 Mineral Property Option and Assignment Agreements between the Company and the Defendants jmo

[Twist Capper]

Hi shoeless.

Yup, I would tend to agree...although I would have liked
to see "the return of claims" actually printed.......

myz69z mp3 today is defnitely worth the 6 minute listen.

www.zshare.net/audio/33938089bc1cba/

[smeagol8]

We get the claims back! Now you see why KW went to see the core samples. It's still the PLAM BABY!

[smeagol8]

Further proof that this was ALWAYS the plam:(assuming we actually gave the claims to Entourage): Entourage did their DD before ever signing the deal. So they would actually have no grounds for complaining about those claims in any way!!

[faithandlogic]

smeagol8 said:

Further proof that this was ALWAYS the plam:(assuming we actually gave the claims to Entourage): Entourage did their DD before ever signing the deal. So they would actually have no grounds for complaining about those claims in any way!!

I agree, they just have to make it look good on paper...

I'm thinking that the original plan was for CMKM to sue Entourage for the claims back, for it was written into the contract that if we were to sue them that the Entourage shares returned to the company.

Entourage doing it this way probably means that we will get the claims back faster.. IMO

[ivory]

Get back our claims and trade again - Just A thought!

[racer]

That the claims come back to us and have been valued already.

That shorty has covered his butt with a great big settlement of sorts so CMKX does not have a open market cover.

For the end to this saga and the beginning of the next ;D

[dcswingtown]

I think we new this was going to happen (or at least we were hoping) Plan is in full force. Hang in there folks!

[faithandlogic]

Kevin said.. "I have been visiting with experts about the Entourage claims and the core samples which I have personally examined. I will report to you any plans regarding these assets when I have something definitive to discuss with you."

Note: He called those claims assets..

www.cmkmdiamondsinc.com/ceoupdates.php

[funado]

twistcapper said:

Hi shoeless.

Yup, I would tend to agree...although I would have liked
to see "the return of claims" actually printed.......

myz69z mp3 today is defnitely worth the 6 minute listen.

www.zshare.net/audio/33938089bc1cba/

You're right, twist. That's a great MP3 to listen to. Let's hope we're really moving forward as myz69z believes.

Funado