On August 24, 2020, this Court entered its  Memorandum Opinion and  Order rejecting Respondent Ukraine's challenges pursuant to Article V of the New York Convention, and granting Petitioner Pao Tatneft's Petition to Confirm Arbitral Award and to Enter Judgment in Favor of Petitioner. See Memorandum Opinion, ECF No. 50; Order, ECF No. 49 (both incorporated by reference herein). As reflected in the August 24, 2020 Memorandum Opinion, the underlying July 29, 2014 foreign arbitral award ("the Award") entered in favor of Petitioner Pao Tatneft and against Respondent Ukraine by the International Arbitral Tribunal, which was confirmed by this Court, was in the amount of US $112 million, with interest at the U.S. dollar LIBOR rate plus 3% compounded every three months, accruing until the date of payment. The Award stated further that the interest on $68.44 million (of the total $112 million) would begin accruing on May 12, 2009, while interest on the other $43.56 million would begin accruing on January 27, 2010, though accrual of interest was suspended for sixty days after the issuance of the Award. Before issuing its Judgment, specifying the exact monetary amount of the award, this Court directed Petitioner Pao Tatneft ("Pao Tatneft") to file a proposed order of judgment, including a brief summary of the calculation of interest, and the Court permitted Respondent Ukraine ("Ukraine") an opportunity to respond thereto. See Order, ECF No. 49.1
Ukraine's  Response alleged primarily that, because there was a computation error in the award; namely, an internal discrepancy in the Award when refencing the two sums on which interest is calculated, this Court was without jurisdiction to correct the error and enter judgment with accrued interest, as the power to correct the discrepancy rests with the arbitral authority.2 Furthermore, Ukraine alleged that, even assuming arguendo that the two underlying sums ($68.44 million and $43.56 million) noted in the dispositive clause of the Award were the correct sums, Pao Tatneft's calculation of interest could be challenged on two additional grounds: (1) it was calculated on a 360-day year; and (2) it was based on an assumption that the USD LIBOR rate would remain at 0,225%. Ukraine concluded therefore that this Court may only enter a judgment on the award as to the principal of $112 million.
ORDERED that the proposed judgment proffered by Pao Tatneft is affirmed by this Court, with the result that Petitioner Pao Tatneft is awarded a judgment against Respondent Ukraine in the amount of USD $112,000,000.00, plus prejudgment interest as provided in the Award, such amounts together comprising USD $172,910,493.00.5 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, the Court will issue a Judgment in a separate document, and it is further
ORDERED that, once the Judgment has been issued, this case shall be DISMISSED.
Already registered ?