Yes, it was meddling with that bug that I cooked this one.
I think Adam got it right:
"There should be no problem between an instance opCall and a constructor". In your case, it seems, a static opCall was clashing with the constructor. But it turns out a non-static opCall clashes with a constructor that AFAIK shouldn't even be there (see my initial post).
--
Atenciosamente / Sincerely,
Guilherme ("n2liquid") Vieira