| Note 7 - Other Contingencies - Litigation | In December, 2011, we initiated civil legal
proceedings against Hycarbex and others in the High Court of Islamabad, Pakistan. Our pleadings with respect to the 2.5% carried
working interest positions in the Sanjawi and Zamzama North concessions sought a registration of those interests with the Government
of Pakistan and simultaneously sought the imposition of an injunction preventing the transfer of the working interest in those
concessions until the registration can be effected, thereby protecting our interests. In our pleadings with respect to the Yasin
concession and the right to receive 18% of the gross production revenues, our pleadings sought a referral to arbitration based
upon ownership of, in effect, a 25% carried working interest to which is attributed 18% of gross production revenues and the right
to receive pertinent records and data, the appointment of a receiver to both protect and cause disbursement of the 18% of gross
revenues since the inception of production in April, 2011, and the imposition of an injunction against the transfer of the working
interest in the Yasin concession. The Court immediately issued two injunction orders preserving the status quo as to the Companys
interests in each of the Yasin, Sanjawi and Zamzama North petroleum concessions. On March 27, 2012, the Islamabad High Court
issued its final order (later clarified as to certain arbitration procedures by a clarification Order dated April 4, 2012). The
Court directed the parties to proceed to arbitration in London, UK under the ICC Rules of Arbitration and further reaffirmed the
continuation of the pending temporary injunctions against Hycarbexs potential transfer of interests in the concessions prior
to final resolution in the arbitration forum. Our application for the appointment of a receiver was neither granted nor denied,
but was instead deferred by the Court to the arbitration forum. Hycarbex appealed the March 27, 2012 Order asserting that litigation
should not have been initiated by American Energy without first going to arbitration, asserting that our claims to 18% of gross
production revenues were premature (despite already having made some payments toward that production interest) because a commercial
discovery had not yet been declared, and asserting that the injunctions had the effect of enjoining all of the working interest,
not just a portion. American Energy countered with an appeal that the Court should reconsider the application for a receiver due
to an existing arbitration rule which would prevent the arbitration forum from granting interim relief of that type, irrespective
of the merits of such an application. These appeals have become moot by virtue of the ICC Partial Final Award described below. On April 10, 2012, pursuant to the terms of
the March 27, 2012, Islamabad High Court Order, we filed our claim with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
International Court of Arbitration seeking an order which voids, ab initio On April 15, 2015, the ICC Arbitration Tribunal
rendered its Partial Final Award in the pending arbitration proceedings which declared that the November 9, 2003 Stock Purchase
Agreement between the Company, Hycarbex and Hydro-Tur, which was amended on February 16, 2004, and December 15, 2009, is void ab
initio |
