brought under the dominican republic - central america - ita
brought under the dominican republic - central america - ita
brought under the dominican republic - central america - ita
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
If <strong>the</strong>re were in fact any inconsistency, <strong>the</strong> Tribunal requests <strong>the</strong> Parties to clarify<br />
<strong>the</strong> full list of <strong>the</strong> jurisdictional objections addressed in <strong>the</strong>se arbitration proceedings.<br />
Accordingly, <strong>the</strong> Tribunal requests <strong>the</strong> Respondent (as <strong>the</strong> Disputing Party raising<br />
jurisdictional objections) briefly to clarify in writing <strong>the</strong> full list of its jurisdictional<br />
objections as soon as possible but no later than 26 September 2011; and <strong>the</strong> Tribunal<br />
requests <strong>the</strong> Claimant (as <strong>the</strong> Disputing Party responding to such objections) to<br />
respond briefly in writing to such clarification, within two weeks of its receipt ...‖<br />
1.43. The Respondent responded to <strong>the</strong> Tribunal‟s request by letter dated 26 September<br />
2011, confirming (inter alia) <strong>the</strong> list of its objections as summarised in an attached<br />
“outline”, as follows (with <strong>under</strong>lining and o<strong>the</strong>r emphasis here omitted):<br />
―I: Primary Objection against all claims in this arbitration: Abuse of Process<br />
If <strong>the</strong> Tribunal finds that Claimant‘s actions constitute Abuse of Process, El Salvador<br />
requests <strong>the</strong> Tribunal to dismiss <strong>the</strong> entire arbitration (Memorial, para. 71) by:<br />
A: Rejecting jurisdiction and dismissing all claims <strong>under</strong> CAFTA (Memorial, paras.<br />
61-70); and<br />
B: Rejecting jurisdiction and dismissing all claims <strong>under</strong> <strong>the</strong> Investment Law of<br />
El Salvador (Memorial, paras. 103-105).<br />
II:<br />
Alternative Objections:<br />
A: Alternative 1: If <strong>the</strong> Tribunal decides that <strong>the</strong>re is no Abuse of Process:<br />
(1) With regard to <strong>the</strong> CAFTA claims, El Salvador requests <strong>the</strong> Tribunal to dismiss<br />
all CAFTA claims for lack of jurisdiction based on any of <strong>the</strong> following<br />
independent objections:<br />
(i) Denial of benefits provisions of CAFTA (Memorial, para. 106; 253-254); or<br />
(ii) Pac-Rim Cayman is not an Investor of a Party (Memorial, paras. 256-<br />
259); or<br />
(iii) There is no jurisdiction ratione temporis (Memorial, paras. 305-318); or<br />
(iv) CAFTA‘s three-year statute of lim<strong>ita</strong>tions precludes consideration of<br />
Claimant‘s main claims (Memorial, paras. 324-336);and<br />
(2) With regard to <strong>the</strong> Investment Law claims, El Salvador requests <strong>the</strong> Tribunal<br />
to dismiss all claims <strong>under</strong> <strong>the</strong> Investment Law of El Salvador for lack of jurisdiction<br />
based on any of <strong>the</strong> following independent objections:<br />
a. Enforcing <strong>the</strong> CAFTA waiver (Memorial, paras. 428-454); or<br />
b. Pac-Rim Cayman is not a ―Foreign Investor‖ <strong>under</strong> <strong>the</strong> Investment Law<br />
(Memorial, paras. 379-380); or<br />
Part 1 – Page 11