Article 55 Interpretation of the Award
(1) Within 45 days after the date of the award either party, with notice to the other party, may request that the Secretary-General obtain from the Tribunal an interpretation of the award.
(2) The Tribunal shall determine the procedure to be followed.
(3) The interpretation shall form part of the award, and the provisions of Articles 52 and 53 of these Rules shall apply.
INTERPRETATION REQUESTED BY CLAIMANTS
2. Claimants seek an Interpretation of the Final Award as follows:
A. In order to properly effectuate the stated principle that the costs of this proceeding should follow the events, Claimants request that the Tribunal take more care to evaluate the numerous decisions contained within the Award as well as interim decisions and conduct prior to the Award in order to determine whether an Award of the entire sum of costs sought by Respondent actually complies with the principle that the costs follow the event.
B. In light of the Tribunal's rejection of Respondent's jurisdictional defense based on the alleged fraud (paragraphs 128140) Claimants request that the Tribunal specifically exclude the extensive fees and costs that were incurred by virtue of this defense, which was specifically not sustained.
C. In light of the Tribunal's conclusions rejecting Respondent's other jurisdictional and admissibility defenses (paragraphs 141-151) Claimants request that the Tribunal specifically exclude fees and costs that were incurred by virtue of this defense, which was specifically not sustained.
D. In light of the Tribunal's conclusions rejecting Respondent's defense on the merits of the BIT claims on the basis of fraud and deceit (paragraphs 153-164) Claimants request that the Tribunal specifically exclude fees and costs that were incurred by virtue of this defense, which was specifically not sustained.
E. In light of the Tribunal's conclusion that it does not question that Claimants initiated and presented the claims in good faith, and specifically in light of the obligation under Article IX(2) of the BIT that the parties should seek initially to settle the dispute by consultation and negotiation and the absolute refusal of the Respondent to even meet with Claimants prior to commencement of the ICSID proceeding, Claimants request that the Tribunal reconsider the award of costs in their entirety or, in the alternative, make a significant adjustment to the costs sought by Respondent based on its pre-arbitration conduct in violation of the BIT.
F. In light of the absence of recitation of several procedural matters from the Award that had significant impact on the cost of the proceedings, including specifically the Respondent's refusal to meet with Claimants prior to commencement of this proceeding and the tardy disclosure by one of the Tribunal members of a significant relationship that required careful investigation and analysis of the privilege to challenge said arbitrator, Claimants request that the Tribunal reconsider and exclude fees and costs for such proceedings.
G. In light of Respondent's refusal to accept Claimants' proposal of a single arbitrator, including the proposal that such arbitrator be Professor Vaughan Lowe, and subsequent agreement to Professor Lowe as President of the Tribunal, Claimants request that the Tribunal reduce the amount awarded for arbitrator compensation.
H. In light of the secret criminal proceedings against Claimants and the extensive fees and costs that were necessitated by the need for Claimants to request and be granted in part emergency measures that resulted in the change of venue of the proceedings, Claimants request that the Tribunal reconsider and exclude fees and costs for such proceedings.
28. For all of the foregoing reasons, Claimants respectfully request that the Tribunal enter an order interpreting the Award pursuant to ICSID Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rule 55.
29. Pursuant thereto, Claimants respectfully request that the Tribunal establish an appropriate procedure to consider a proper cost allocation that will follow all of the events decided by this Tribunal and the Award, not merely allocate every dollar of the costs incurred against Claimants.
30. Alternatively, Claimants respectfully request that the Tribunal reverse its Award of Costs entirely based upon the failure of Respondent to comply with the BIT obligation to meet and attempt to resolve disputes.
20. For all of the foregoing reasons, Claimants respectfully request that the Tribunal enter an order interpreting the Award pursuant to ICSID Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rule 55.
21. Pursuant thereto, Claimants respectfully request that the Tribunal adjust its Cost allocation and reduce the sum awarded against Claimants to effect the true intent that the costs should follow all of the events in this proceeding, not just the outcome on the merits of a claim pursued in good faith.
Both the Request and the Supplement aim to reverse the dispositive part of the Award with respect to the ruling on costs of arbitration. Such action manifestly exceeds the purpose and confines of the procedure instituted by Claimants under Article 55 of the ICSID (Additional Facility) Arbitration Rules.2
two main conditions for the admissibility of an application for interpretation: first, there has to be a dispute between the original parties as to the meaning or scope of the award; second, the purpose of the application must be to obtain an interpretation of the award.3
The Tribunal decides:
(1) That the Claimants' request for the interpretation of the Award is dismissed;
(2) That the Claimants should bear all reasonable costs of the interpretation proceedings, including all the ICSID arbitration costs and expenses, reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the Respondent in the preparation of its legal case related to the interpretation proceeding and their own expenses; and
(3) As a consequence, the Claimants shall pay US$23,099.46 to the Respondent.