Vordering tot vernietiging van een arbitrale 'order' afgewezen, UNCITRAL.
Paushok v. Mongolia Sergei Paushok, CJSC Golden East Company and CJSCVostokneftegaz Company v. The Government of Mongolia
"Claimants shall inform Respondent and the Tribunal, within sixty days from the date of this Award, as to whether they intend to claim damages under paragraph 5 of this Decision."
"Claimants request a stay of the 60-day period in which to notify the Tribunal of Claimants' decision with regard to whether they will seek damages until the Tribunal issues its decision on the foregoing requests."
"Claimants are granted 30 days after receipt of the Tribunal's decision on the content of their letter of 27 May to decide whether they wish to proceed with a claim for damages."
"(...) the Tribunal informed the Parties that Claimants were granted 30 days after receipt of the Tribunal's decision on the content of their requests for an additional award and for interpretation of the Award to decide whether they wish to proceed with a claim for damages."
"For the avoidance of doubt, this 30-day period will start upon the issuance of the present awards."
"I am somewhat surprised by your letter arriving more then 7 years after the final Award of the Tribunal. I confirm that I have destroyed the file."
"I confirm that I have destroyed the file. I have nothing more to add in connection with a case which came to an end eight years ago."
"In the absence of a valid notice of termination under the UNCITRAL Rules and the law of the seat, the proceedings remain open until the Tribunal discharges its role of determining the damages due to our client. The Claimant is ready to proceed to the damages phase of this proceeding immediately. We are instructed that the delay in pursuing damages on our client's part is directly attributable to the conduct of Mongolia. Following commencement of the above-mentioned proceedings, Mongolia launched a campaign of harassment against the Claimant. Mr [appellant] had been threatened, badgered and abused by the Mongolian authorities for several years. This sustained campaign of harassment forced Mr [appellant] to expend every effort to defend himself, leaving him no occasion to pursue his claim for the damages rightfully owed to him. In light of the above, we invite each member of the Tribunal to confirm that they can continue to serve in this case. However, if the Tribunal considers that the proceedings have been validly terminated, we would be grateful for the Tribunal's reasoned view to that effect."
"(...) I am writing this letter on behalf of the members of the tribunal which rendered an Award on Jurisdiction and Liability (...) on April 22, 2011. The Tribunal is of the view that its Award constituted a final and binding award. That Award ruled in its Decision that Claimants could claim for damages on one element of the case and that they had 60 days to inform the Tribunal as to whether they intended to claim damages. The Tribunal having received no such notice on behalf of the Claimants within the ordered delay, the Tribunal considers that it had become automatically functus officio. In any event, so as to remove any doubt in that regard, the Tribunal formally closes this case (see the attached Order) as of this date (...)"
"Tribunal's Order The Tribunal has received representations on behalf of the Claimants to the effect that the above-noted case had not been terminated in accordance with Article 32 of the UNCITRAL Model Law. The Tribunal is of the view that its Award of April 28, 2011 constituted a final and binding award and that, the Claimants having failed to give notice within the 60 days delay that it intended to claim damages, as provided in the Decision of the Tribunal (...), the Tribunal became functus officio. In any event, so as to remove any doubt on this issue and assuming that the Tribunal is not functus officio, the Tribunal hereby declares that this case is terminated as of the date of this Order, the Claimants having failed to register their recognized limited claim within the delay imposed by the Tribunal in its above-mentioned Decision."