Lawyers, other representatives, expert(s), tribunal’s secretary

Final Award

I. The Parties

A. The Claimant

1.
The Claimant in this arbitration is HZPC Holland B.V. (Besloten venootschap), a company duly registered under the laws of the Netherlands, having number 01084958, with its head office located at Joure Edisonweg 5, Joure ("Claimant" or "HZPC).
2.
Claimant is represented in this arbitration by Prof. Dr. Mohamed S. Abdel Wahab, Mr. Mahmoud Shaltout, Mr. Youssef Al Saman, Mr. Ahmed Owais, and Ms. Yosra Hashem of Zulficar & Partners Law Firm, Nile City Building, South Tower, Eighth Floor, 2005 A Cornich El Nil, Ramlet Beaulac 11221, Cairo, Egypt.1

B. The Respondents

3.
The Respondents in this arbitration are (i) Al Pharaana for Import and Export S.A.E., a joint stock company registered under the laws of the Arab Republic of Egypt, having commercial register number 131750, with its head office located at 40 Al Horreya Street, Alexandria Arab Republic of Egypt, legally represented by Mr. Ibrahim Mohamed Abdel Hamid Beshara in his capacity as Chairman ("Respondent 1" or "Al Pharaana"); and (ii) Mr. Ibrahim Mohamed Abdel Hamid Beshara, an Egyptian national, holder of passport number 654063, residing at 7 Angelique Church street, Stanly, Alexandria, Egypt and/or Bolestein 754, 1081 EP Amsterdam ("Respondent 2" or Mr. Beshara")
4.
The Claimant and the Respondents are collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Parties".

II. The Arbitral Tribunal

5.
The Arbitral Tribunal ("Tribunal") is composed of the following names with the respective contact details:

Mr. Mohammed M. Gomaa, the co-arbitrator nominated by Claimant,
Zaki Hashem & Partners
23 Kasr El Nil St.,
Cairo, Egypt
Tel.: +20 2 2399 9999
Fax: +20 2 2393 3585
Cell Phone: +20 100 600 60 33
mgomaa@hashemlaw.com

Mr. Christopher Adebayo Ojo, SAN, the co- arbitrator nominated by the Center on behalf of the Respondent,
ITF House, (4th Floor) No.6
Adetokunbo Ademola
Crescent, Wuse 2
Abuja, Nigeria
cabayoojo@aol.com

Mr. Ashraf A. Yehia, the president of the Arbitral Tribunal, nominated by both co-arbitrators,
Yehia Associates
13 Omar Ebn El Khattab st.,
Off el Nasr Road, Heliopolis west,
Cairo, Egypt
Tel: (+202)2305
(+202) 2305 4682
Fax: (+202) 2415 2126
info@yehiaassociates.com

III. The Arbitration Agreement and the Applicable Law

A. The Applicable Law

6.
On 3 January 2014, Claimant and Respondents entered into a tripartite settlement agreement (the "SA").2 Article 7.1 of the SA reads as follows:

"7.1 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Arab Republic of Egypt.

B. The Arbitration Agreement

7.
Article 7.2 of the SA reads as follows:

"7.2 Any dispute, controversy, or claim arising out of or in connection with this Agreement including but not limited to the execution, termination, validity and/or termination of this Agreement or relating thereto, shall be finally settled by arbitration in accordance with the arbitration rides of the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (the "Rules"). The seat of arbitration shall be in Cairo, Egypt. English shall be the language of the proceedings, and the arbitral tribunal shall be composed of three (3) arbitrators appointed in pursuant to the Rules. The award rendered by the tribunal shall be final and binding on the Parties, and shall include a determination on costs and expenses including lawyers’ fees."

IV. Summary of the Procedure to date

8.
On 7 March 2017, Claimant submitted its Notice of Arbitration ("NoA") to the Cairo Regional Center for International Commercial Arbitration (the "Centre" or "CRCICA") together with Exhibits C-l to C-13. The NOA included Claimant’s nomination of Mr. Mohammed M. Gomaa as co-arbitrator in these proceedings.
9.
On 16 March 2017, CRCICA failed to deliver the NoA to Respondent 1 according to the courier’s report.
10.
On 17 March 2017, the NoA was successfully delivered to Mr. Beshara, (Respondent 2), by courier at his address in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, according to the courier’s delivery report of 17 March 2017.3
11.
On 24 May 2017, Claimant served a second notification on Respondent 2, through Court Bailiffs, at his address in Egypt known to Claimant according to the national ID of Mr. Beshara.4
12.
On 13 July 2017, Claimant served a notification of the NoA on Respondent 1 through Court Bailiff at its headquarters known to Claimant according to the information included in the commercial register of Respondent l.5
13.
On 19 July 2017, Claimant filed an application under Article 20 of the CRCICA Rules requesting to treat the NoA as its Statement of Claim and to render an award on the merits on the basis of the NoA given that Respondents are not participating in the proceedings despite being legally notified thereof.
14.
On 3 August 2017, the CRCICA issued its letter to the Parties confirming that, "Unless otherwise received from the Respondents, the Centre, according to Article 9/2 of the Rules, shall appoint an arbitrator on behalf of the Respondents at the request of the Claimant". The CRCICA also specified in same letter that this arbitration is hitherto proceeding ex parte.
15.
Accordingly, on 30 August 2017, the CRCICA appointed, on behalf of Respondents, Mr. Christopher Adebayo Ojo, SAN as a co-arbitrator.
16.
On 11 September 2017, the CRCICA informed Mr. Ashraf A. Yehia that he has been appointed by the co-arbitrators to act as the presiding arbitrator in this case and the CRCICA advised the Parties accordingly by way of its email dated 26 September 2017.
17.
By way of an email dated 27 September 2017, the Tribunal advised the Parties of its due constitution and requested the Parties to provide any comments or further elaboration on Claimant's request dated 19 July 2017.
18.
On same day, by way of email, Claimant confirmed its earlier stance and further requested the restitution of the costs and expenses it incurred in these proceedings with a total amount of USS 147,781.73.6
19.
On 17 October 2017, in the absence of any other submission or comments made by either Party, the Tribunal issued its decision to consider the proceedings as closed.

V. Background and Details of the Dispute

20.
As outlined in the NoA, the dispute between Claimant and Respondents arises out of a settlement agreement ("SA") concluded on 3 January 2014, between Claimant HZPC Holland B.V., as creditor, and Respondents AI Pharaana for Import & Export, as being the Debtor and Mr. Ibrahim Mohamed Abdel-Hamid Beshara (Respondent 2), who signed the SA as being tire Guarantor, for the purpose of settlement and repayment to Claimant of some due and outstanding amounts on Al Pharaana (Respondent 1).7
21.
Under Article 2.1 of the SA, Respondents explicitly acknowledged and undertook to settle the outstanding amounts owed to Claimant, amounting in aggregate to Euros 12,195,000 (¬ uro twelve million, one hundred and ninety five thousand) (the "Debt"). Article 2.1 of the SA reads as follows:

"The Debtor and Mr. Beshara hereby jointly, severally and irrevocably acknowledge that the Debt as defined in the forehead of this Agreement, and that it is due for Payment to HZPC."

22.
The SA stipulated under Article 4 that the Debt shall be paid in seven instalments, the first of which was due on 30 September 2014, in accordance with the payment schedule under Annex 1 to the SA. Article 4 of the SA stipulates that:

"The Debtor and the Guarantor shall pay to HZPC the Debt in Euros or any other currency acceptable by HZPC, according to the installments outlined in the Payment Schedule in Annex (1) to this Agreement through a wire transfer to the following bank account designated by HZPC."

23.
Moreover, Article 2.2 of the SA stipulated that Respondents shall:

"(...) commit collectively to the payment of the Debt according to the installments outlined under Annex (1) to this Agreement, and that the amounts and payment dates are correct and accurate without any reservation or contestation in the present or in the future."

24.
Respondents have further provided together an explicit undertaking, under joint and several liability, to pay the Debt in full. The SA states in Article 2.4 that:

"Mr. Beshara and the Debtor undertake jointly and severally to pay the Debt to HZPC in accordance with the installments outlined in the Payment Schedule in Annex (1) hereto. The Guarantor guarantees, in joint liability with the Debtor, the fulfillment of all the Debtor’s obligations towards HZPC under this Agreement. The Guarantor's joint obligation with the Debtor to pay the Debt collectively shall remain in force until full payment of the Debt."

25.
Yet, no payment under the SA was ever received by Claimant,8 which eventually led to the initiation of these proceedings.
26.
In its NoA, Claimant submits that no payments have ever been received by the Claimant from Respondents under the SA in an outright breach of their obligations under the SA and Egyptian Law, and are thus, jointly and severally liable and accountable to pay to Claimant the Debt in full, and compensate it for the damages sustained by it as a result of the acts of Respondents.9
27.
Claimant also submits that Respondents’ actions are considered not only fundamental breaches to the material contractual obligations under the SA, but also as breaches to the Parties’ obligations under the overarching principles of Egyptian Law, being the governing law of the SA, according to Article 7.1 thereof10, including the breach to their obligation to honor contracts and perform them in accordance with their provisions, under Articles 147/1 and 148/1 of the Egyptian Civil Code ("ECC") which state that:

Article 147/1 of the ECC:

"The Contract makes the law of the parties and may not be revoked or am ended except by agreement of the parties, or for the reasons imposed by the Law."

Article 148/1 of the ECC:

"A contract must be performed in accordance with its contents and in compliance with the requirements of good faith."11

28.
Claimant added that in manifest bad faith and misrepresentation, Respondents have unjustifiably failed to fulfill their obligations under the SA, although they have explicitly represented and warranted under Article (3-a) of the SA that each of Al Pharaana and Mr. Beshara (Respondents) are in good standing. Article (3-a) of the SA reads as follows:

"Each Party is in good standing under the laws of its country of domicile and has the requisite legal right and full power and authority to own its assets and carry out its business as currently in effect."12

29.
Claimant also submits that along with the amounts outstanding under the SA and the legal interest thereon automatically entitled to it by virtue Article 228 of the ECC13, it is entitled to fair and adequate compensation for all the severe material and moral damages sustained by Claimant as stipulated in Article 157/1 of the ECC.14
30.
Concerning Claimant’s entitlement to interest, Claimant relied in its NoA upon Article 50 of the Code of Commerce which refers to interest calculated at the rate declared by the Central Bank of Egypt, where an obligation is a commercial debt, and added that in such case Article 64 refers to calculation of delay interest as of the date of the commercial debt becoming due.15
31.
Claimant then submits that its entitlement to delay interest does not hinge upon evidencing that Claimant has sustained damages due to Respondents’ non-payment of the Debt,16 and that Claimant is also entitled to supplementary damages referred to under Article 231 of the ECC.17

VI. Relief Requested by Claimant

32.
Claimant requests the Tribunal to:

i. Declare the Respondents jointly and severally in default with respect to their obligations under the SA;

ii. Order the Respondents jointly and severally to pay to the Claimant, in full, the Debt amounting to Euros 12,195,000 (twelve million, one hundred and ninety five thousand Euros);

iii. Order the Respondents jointly and severally to pay compensation to the Claimant for the material and moral damages sustained by the Claimant, including loss of profits, as a result of the Respondent’s manifest bad faith, misrepresentation, and non-performance of the Respondents obligations under the SA, as and when shall be quantified by the Claimant during the course of the present proceedings;

iv. Order the Respondents jointly and severally to pay to the Claimant supplementary damages in accordance with Article 231 of the ECC for the damage sustained by Claimant due to the Respondents’ bad faith as and when shall be quantified by the Claimant during the course of the present proceedings;

v. Order any other compensations, entitlements, or claims, which Claimant deems appropriate to claim dining the present arbitral proceedings;

vi. Order the Respondents jointly and severally to pay and reimburse the Claimant for all the costs and expenses of the present arbitration including Counsel fees and costs; and

vii. Order the Respondents jointly and severally to pay to the Claimant interest accrued on the amounts requested under (ii) - (vi) above, at the rate declared by the Central Bank of Egypt, in accordance with Article 50 of the Egyptian Code of Commerce, calculated as of the due date till full and final payment to Claimant.

VII. The Arbitral Tribunal’s Analysis

A. Introduction:

33.
The Tribunal notes that, under Article 7.1 of the SA, this latter is governed by the law of the Arab Republic of Egypt. Further, any dispute arising out of the SA, according to its Article 7.2, is to be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (the "Rules").
34.
According to Article 20 of these Rules, a claimant may elect to treat its notice of arbitration as a statement of claim, as long as the notice of arbitration complies with the requirements of paragraphs 2 and 3 of same Article.
35.
Article 20.2 states that:

"the Statement of claim shall include the following particulars:

a. The names and contact details of the parties,

b. A statement of the fact supporting the claim,

c. The points at issue,

d. The relief or remedy sought, and

e. The legal grounds or arguments supporting the claim."

36.
Article 20.3 stipulates that:

"the Statement of Claim should, as far as possible, be accompanied by all documents and other evidence relied upon by the Claimant or contains references to them."

37.
On 19 July 2017, Claimant elected to treat the NoA as its statement of claim for purposes of the detailed explanation of its claims and relief sought in the present proceedings.18
38.
Meanwhile, according to Article 30.1.b of the Rules, if within the period of time fixed by these Rules or the arbitral tribunal and without showing sufficient cause, "Respondent has failed to communicate its response to the notice of arbitration or its statement of defence, the arbitral tribunal shall order that the proceedings continue, without treating such failure in itself as an admission of the claimant’s allegations".
39.
Also, Article 31.1 of the Rules provides that:

"The arbitral tribunal may inquire of the parties if they have any further proof to offer or witnesses to be heard or submissions to make and, if there are none, it may declare the hearings closed."

40.
In this respect, on 27 September 2017, tire Arbitral Tribunal requested both Parties’ comments or further elaboration on the Claimant’s submission dated 19 July 2017, by virtue of which Claimant requested the Arbitral Tribunal to render an Award on the merits on the basis of the NoA.19
41.
Claimant provided its response on same day20, confirming its earlier said request of 19 July 2017 and also claiming the costs and expenses it incurred in regard to these proceedings.
42.
Yet, no response was ever received from Respondents, who also failed to present any answer to the NoA or to Claimant’s request submitted thereafter, despite the fact that both Respondent’s were duly notified by the Centre of these proceedings, as explained in the preceding sections of this Award.
43.
Therefore, the Tribunal shall proceed with this case further, treat Claimant’s NoA as its statement of claim and render its Award accordingly.

B. Claimant’s specific Claims:

44.
In its NoA, Section IX entitled "Prayers for Relief’, Claimant requests the Tribunal to declare Respondents jointly and severally in default with respect to their obligations under the SA.
45.
Article 1 of the Law on Evidence stipulates that:

"The Creditor must prove the obligation and the debtor must discharge himself from it."

46.
Thus, it suffices that Claimant evidences the existence of the obligation, hence demonstrating the debtor’s preoccupation by this obligation. The debtor must then prove its discharge therefrom.
47.
Claimant in these proceedings has evidenced the existence of Respondents’ obligations by presenting the SA (Exhibit C-l), where Respondents explicitly acknowledged and undertook - under Article 2.1 of the SA - to settle the outstanding amounts owed to Claimant amounting in aggregate to ¬ 12, 195, 000 (the "Debt"). Article 2.1 of the SA reads as follows:

"The Debtor and Mr. Beshara hereby jointly, severally and irrevocably acknowledge that the Debt as defined in the forehead of this Agreement, and that it is due for Payment to HZPC."

48.
Moreover, Respondents confirmed in Article 2.2 of the SA that they are committed

"collectively to the payment of the Debt". This Article stipulates in unambiguous words that the amount of the Debt and its dates of payment are accurate and correct and that Respondents have fully waived any contestation thereof.

49.
Respondents have further provided together an explicit undertaking, under joint and several liability, to pay the Debt in full. Article 2.4 of the SA provides that:

"Mr. Beshara and the Debtor undertake jointly and severally to pay the Debt to HZPC in accordance with the installments outlined m the payment Schedule in Annex 1 hereto. The Guarantor guarantees, in joint liability with the Debtor, the fulfillment of all the Debtor’s obligations towards HZPC under this Agreement. The Guarantor’s joint obligation with the Debtor to pay the Debt collectively shall remain in force until full payment of the Debt."

50.
Accordingly, it is clear that, as the Guarantor, Respondent 2 provided an explicit personal guarantee, under joint and several liability, with respect to the fulfillment of all of the obligations under the SA.
51.
Furthermore, according to the above mentioned provisions, Mr. Beshara expressly and unquestionably guaranteed in joint and several liability, the full payment of the Debt, and the fulfillment of all the obligations of Respondent 1 under the SA.
52.
The SA stipulated under Article 4 that the Debt shall be paid in seven instalments, the first of which was due on 30 September 2014, in accordance with the payment schedule under Annex 1 to the SA. Article 4 of the SA stipulates that:

"The Debtor and the Guarantor shall pay to HZPC the Debt in Euros or any other currency acceptable by HZPC, according to the installments outlined in the Payment Schedule in Annex 1 to this Agreement through a wire transfer to the following bank account designated by HZPC."

53.
Claimant alleges that Respondent did not pay any of the installments specified in the SA. Respondent, despite being duly notified of the NoA (Exhibit- 1, 2, 5 & 6 attached to Claimant’s submission dated 19 July 2017), failed to reply to or to defeat any allegation assigned to either of them under the NoA.
54.
It has thus been established before this Tribunal that Respondents failed to honor the Debt and their respective obligations under the SA.
55.
Therefore, the Tribunal is satisfied that Respondents, jointly and severally, are in default with respect to their obligations under the SA.
56.
Second, Claimant requests the Tribunal to order Respondents jointly and severally to pay to it, in full the Debt amounting to Euros 12,195,000 (twelve million, one hundred and ninety five thousand Euros).
57.
As mentioned above, the SA stipulated under Article 4 that the Debt shall be paid on seven installments, the first of which was due on 30 September 2014, in accordance with the payment schedule under Annex 1 to the SA. Article 4 of the SA stipulates that:

"The Debtor and the Guarantor shall pay to HZPC the Debt in Euros or any other currency acceptable by HZPC, according to the installments outlined in the Payment Schedule in Annex 1 to this Agreement through a wire transfer to the following bank account designated by HZPC."

58.
Furthermore, Article 5.2 of the SA stated that:

"Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, this Agreement shall be automatically terminated without a need for a notice or taking any legal procedures, if the Event of Default has not been remedied within fifteen days from the date of its occurrence, and accordingly, all installments as per Schedule Annex (1) to this Agreement, including the Seventh installment, shall become due immediately."

59.
In other words, Article 5.2 of the SA addresses that the occurrence of an Event of Default which is not remedied within fifteen days accelerates all the installments outlined under Annex 1 to the SA and the Debt becomes immediately due for payment in full.
60.
In light of the above, since Respondents failed to pay any of the installments under the SA, the SA provides that this default renders the Debt due in full.
61.
Therefore, the Tribunal finds that Claimant has the right to claim the full amount of Debt. The Tribunal thus orders Respondents, jointly and severally to pay to Claimant, in full, the Debt amounting to Euros 12,195,000.
62.
Third, Claimant requests the Tribunal to order Respondents jointly and severally to pay compensation to Claimant for the material and moral damages sustained by Claimant, including loss of profits.
63.
Article 157-1 of the ECC stipulates that:

"In bilateral contracts, if any of the contracting parties does not perform its obligation, the other contracting party, after notifying the debtor, may either request the performance of the contract or its rescission along with compensation in either case, if warranted."

64.
According to Article 157-1, Claimant has the right to claim compensation.
65.
Article 221 of the Egyptian Civil Code states that:

"If the amount of damages has not been established within the parties’ contract or by law, the judge will determine it."

66.
However, Claimant failed to evidence, before this Tribunal, the occurrence of these damages and the quantum thereof. Therefore, the Tribunal finds this request inadmissible.
67.
Fourth. Claimant requests supplementary damages to be paid by Respondents jointly and severally in accordance with article 231 of the ECC for the damage sustained by Claimant due to the Respondents’ bad faith.
68.
However, Claimant failed to evidence, before this Tribunal, the occurrence of these damages and the quantum thereof. Therefore, the Tribunal finds this request inadmissible.
69.
Fifth, Claimant requested in its NoA that the Tribunal orders any other compensations, entitlements or claims, which Claimant deems appropriate to claim during the present proceedings.
70.
All claims presented by Claimant in these proceedings have been analyzed in the different sections of this Award and, accordingly, this request, in itself is, therefore, already dispensed with.
71.
Sixth, Claimant requests the Arbitral Tribunal to order Respondents, jointly and severally, to pay and reimburse Claimant for all the costs a nd expenses of the present arbitration. The total amount claimed by Claimant under this request is US$147,781.73.21
72.
Article 42(1) of the CRCICA Rules provides that the costs of the Arbitration are to be fixed in the award, while Article 42(2) of same Rules determines these costs as being:

"a. A registration fee to be determined in accordance with article 43 of the Rules;

b. The administrative fees to be determined in accordance with article 44 of the Rules;

c. The fees of the arbitral tribunal to be determined in accordance with article 45 of the Rules:

d. The reasonable travel and other expenses incurred by the arbitrators;

e. The reasonable costs of expert advice and of other assistance (translation, case reporting, etc...) required by the arbitral tribunal:

f. The reasonable travel and other expenses of witnesses to the extent such expenses are approved by the arbitral tribunal;

g. The legal and other costs incurred by the parties in relation to the arbitration to the extent that the arbitral tribunal determines that the amount of such costs is reasonable; and

h. Any fees and expenses of the appointing authority in case the Centre is not designated as the appointing authority."

73.
Article 46 (1) of the Rules provides that:

"The Costs of the arbitration shall in principle be borne by the unsuccessful party. However, the arbitral tribunal may apportion each of such costs between the parties if it determines that apportionment is reasonable, taking into account the circumstances of the case."

74.
Claimant fully paid the total arbitration cost of these proceedings, determined by the CRCICA, at the amount of USS 109,491.22
75.
Claimant also claims an amount of USS 38,290.73 as being its counsel’s legal fees, costs and expenses.23 The Tribunal deems this amount appropriate and reasonable, hence orders its payment by Respondents.
76.
Accordingly, and taking into consideration tire discretion in allocating the costs of the arbitration empowered to the Tribunal under Article 46(1) of the Rules, the Tribunal orders that Respondents, jointly and severally, pay to Claimant the entire costs relevant to these proceedings at the sum of USS 147,781.73.
77.
Seventh, Claimant requests the Tribunal to order Respondents jointly and severally to pay interest accrued on all awarded amounts at the rate declared by the Central Bank of Egypt in accordance with Article 50 of the Egyptian Code of Commerce.
78.
Article 50-1 of the Code of Commerce reads as follow:

"The loans concluded by the Merchant for handling affairs associated with his business shall be considered commercial."

79.
Also, Article 50-3 states that:

"The interest shall be calculated according to the rate set by the Central Bank, unless a lower rate is agreed."

80.
And Article 64 of same Code states that:

"Interest on delay in payment of commercial debts shall become due once they become due, unless the law or the agreement provides otherwise. In all cases, the total of the interest to be received by the creditor may not exceed the amount of the debt based on which the interest was calculated, unless the law, or the prevailing custom, provides otherwise."

81.
Thus, Claimant is entitled to interest, according to the rate set by the Central Bank, on the amount awarded to it in regard to the Debt, i. e. ¬ 12,195,000, from the date when payments became due, i. e. 30 September 2014, until the date of full payment according to Article 64 of the Egyptian Code of Commerce. Claimant is also entitled to interest, with same rate, on the amount awarded to it in regard to costs and expenses,

i. e. US$ 147,781.73 for the period as of the date of this Award and until its full payment by Respondents.

VIII. Dispositif

82.
For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal, after deliberation, decides and determines as follows:

Award

i. Respondents are considered, jointly and severally, in default with respect to their obligations under the settlement agreement dated 3 January 2014.

ii. Respondents are ordered to pay, jointly and severally, to Claimant the sum of ¬ uros 12,195,000 (twelve million one hundred ninety five thousand Euros), with interest thereon at the rate declared by the Central Bank of Egypt, from the date of 30 September 2014 until the date of full payment by Respondents.

iii. Respondents are ordered to pay, jointly and severally, to Claimant the sum of USS 147,781.73 (one hundred forty seven thousand seven hundred eighty one United Sates Dollars & Seventy Three Cents), with interest thereon at the rate declared by the Central Bank of Egypt, from the date of this Award until the date of full payment by Respondents.

iv. All other requests are hereby dismissed.

Whole document
para.
Click on the text to select an element Click elsewhere to unselect an element
Select a key word :
1 /

Instantly access the most relevant case law, treaties and doctrine.

Start your Free Trial

Already registered ?