SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Report of Foreign Private Issuer

Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16

under the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the month of ~~July~~December 2006

Vannessa Ventures Ltd.

(Translation of registrant’s name into English)

000-30462

(Commission File Number)

Suite 220, 1010 – 1^st Street SW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2R 1K4

(Address of principal executive offices)

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

Form 20-F [X] 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 the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this Form 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- .

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.

VANNESSA VENTURES LTD.

(Registrant)

Date: ~~July~~December 3122, 2006

By:

/s/ Cameron B. Boyer

Name: Cameron B. Boyer

Title: Controller

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit

Description

~~99.~~1.

News Release, 2722 ~~July~~December 2006 – - English

News Release, 22 December 2006 - English


	click here for printer-friendly PDF version

VANNESSA VENTURES LTD.

220, 1010 – 1^St S.W.

Calgary, Alberta T2R 1K4

Telephone: (403) 444-5191

NEWS RELEASE

~~July~~December 2722, 2006 ~~Trading~~SYMBOL ~~Symbol~~TSXV: VVV

~~Vannessa~~Extension ~~Arbitration~~of ~~Update~~Expiry Date of 1,344,500 Warrants by One Year

Vannessa Ventures Ltd. (the “Company”) ~~has~~- anThe ~~arbitral~~Company ~~claim~~will ~~being~~seek ~~heard~~approval infrom ~~accordance with~~ the ~~rules~~TSX ofVenture ~~the~~Exchange ~~International~~to ~~Centre~~extend ~~for~~the ~~Settlement~~expiry date of ~~Investment Disputes (ICSID) in Washington~~1,344,500 ~~D.C.~~share ~~where~~purchase ~~Vannessa~~warrants ~~is requesting remedies under~~ (the ~~Bilateral~~“Warrants”) ~~Investment~~issued ~~Treaty~~on ~~between~~January ~~Venezuela~~11, ~~and Canada~~2005. All ~~The~~Warrants ~~Company,~~currently inentitle ~~its Request filed in July 2004, asked~~ the ~~Arbitration~~holders ~~Tribunal~~ to ~~award~~acquire ~~restitution~~one ofadditional ~~Vannessa’s~~common ~~contractual~~share ~~rights to develop the Las Cristinas project and the return~~ of ~~all property of MINCA confiscated by~~ the ~~Corporacion~~Company ~~Venezolana~~at dea ~~Guayana~~price ~~(CVG) and the Government~~ of ~~Venezuela and monetary damages of US~~ $500.40 ~~million~~per ~~plus~~share ~~interest~~up ~~or,~~until inJanuary ~~lieu of restitution~~11, ~~monetary damages in the amount of US $1,045 million plus interest which includes out of pocket expenses and lost profits~~2007.

~~Vannessa~~The ~~alleges~~Company ~~that~~proposes ~~the~~to ~~Government~~extend ~~of Venezuela, including their agency~~ the ~~CVG,~~expiry ~~which~~date ~~owns 5 percent~~ of ~~MINCA, breached~~ the ~~Bilateral~~outstanding ~~Investment~~Warrants ~~Treaty~~to inJanuary ~~place between Venezuela and Canada. Vannessa also alleges that the Government of Venezuela has expropriated the investments of Vannessa~~11, ~~Vannessa~~2008 dewith ~~Venezuela~~no ~~and~~other ~~MINCA~~terms ~~without due process~~ of ~~law, in a discriminatory manner and without prompt adequate and effective compensation, contrary to Article VII of~~ the ~~Bilateral~~Warrants ~~Investment~~being ~~Treaty, and that the Government of Venezuela failed to accord fair and equitable treatment and full security to Vannessa de Venezuela and MINCA, contrary to Article II (2) of the Treaty~~amended.

The ~~Company~~proposed ~~submitted~~extension ~~its~~of ~~Memorial setting out its argument and written evidence on January 13, 2006. Venezuela recently raised objections regarding~~ the ~~Tribunal’s~~expiry ~~jurisdiction~~date in this matter and the Tribunal has scheduled a hearing to address Venezuela’s objections in May 2007. Counsel has advised the Company that jurisdictional objections are not uncommon in arbitration cases of ~~this~~these ~~kind.~~Warrants ~~The~~is ~~Company~~subject ~~remains confident in its position that the Tribunal has jurisdiction~~ to ~~arbitrate~~approval ~~this dispute. A hearing on the merits~~ of the ~~claim~~TSX ~~will~~Venture ~~be scheduled if the Tribunal rules in the Company’s favor on the jurisdictional objection~~Exchange.

~~Although~~By ~~the~~order ~~Company is confident in the validity~~ of ~~its position, there can be no assurance that it will be successful in all, or part, of its claims. Any awards arising from~~ the ~~claim will be shared with other shareholders or royalty holders of MINCA and Vannessa de Venezuela according to pre-existing contractual rights.~~Board,

“John Morgan,”

John Morgan, President

~~Vannessa~~ VANNESSA ~~Ventures~~VENTURES ~~Ltd~~LTD.

“The TSX Venture Exchange does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.”

VANNESSA VENTURES LTD.

220, 1010 – 1^St S.W.

Calgary, Alberta T2R 1K4

Telephone: (403) 444-5191

NEWS RELEASE


December 22, 2006 - Calgary	Trading Symbol: TSXV: VVV

Update - Supreme Court Decision on Crucitas Concession

On December 5, 2006 Vannessa Ventures Ltd. (“the Company”) published a press release to clarify articles that had been in circulation suggesting that the Exploitation Concession held by the Company’s subsidiary, Industrias Infinito S.A. (“Infinito”) might be cancelled. In this release it was explained that the Company had complied with the requirements of the Supreme Court ruling with respect to completing the Environmental Impact Study and holding the Public Meeting.

Further to the December 5, 2006 news release regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Company has retained the services of Dr. Rubén Hernández Valle (“Dr. Hernández”), a distinguished Costa Rican attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law. Dr. Hernández has reviewed the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding the resolution which granted Infinito’s exploitation concession (mining licence). In a written opinion he has confirmed that the ruling is in the form of a “partial annulment”, which is to say that the judgment was made because certain conditions had not been met. A partial annulment makes provision for the affected party (Infinito) to take corrective action by providing evidence that it has met the required conditions. In Infinito’s case, the conditions consist of submitting an Environmental Impact Statement and holding a General Public Meeting.

Infinito, with the assistance of Dr. Hernández, will now meet with the Ministry of Mines, Energy and the Environment (“MINAE”), and provide them with material substantiating Infinito’s compliance with the required conditions. MINAE will then be requested to confirm that the conditions of the partial annulment have been met. The laws associated with a partial annulment provide for MINAE to confirm Infinito’s exploitation concession, making it retroactive to its original date of approval, December 17^th, 2001.

The Company wishes to emphasize that it is the rights to commence mining that is being addressed, not the underlying title to the mineral concession itself.

“John Morgan”

John Morgan, President

VANNESSA VENTURES LTD.

“The TSX Venture Exchange does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.”

Filing Compare · Infinito Gold Ltd.