1. Mr. Mohammad Al-Shahaat Al-Sayed Hasanain, attorney at the Courts of Cassation, of Egyptian nationality, with his office located at 257, Al-Hejaz Street, El-Nozha, Helioplis Cairo.
(Chairman of the Arbitration Panel)
2. Mr. Mohammad Arsheed Abdullah Aldeiri, Lawyer, of Jordanian nationality, with his office located at Villa No. 32, Abdullah Ghosha Street, Amman, Jordan.
(Arbitrator nominated by the Claimants)
3. Dr. Abul-Ela Ali Abul-Ela Al-Nimr, Professor and Head of Private International Law at the Faculty of Law. Ain Shams University, Attorney at the Courts of Cassation, an Arbitrator approved under a Resolution by the Minister of Justice, of Egyptian nationality, with his office located at the 8th Floor, 10, Al-Oboor Buildings, Salah Salem Road, Cairo.
(Arbitrator nominated by the Defendant)
The Arbitration Case Is Filed by:
First: Mr. Waleed Bin Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al-Qarqani. in his personal capacity, and as Agent of the heirs of late/ Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al-Qarqani. who are the heirs of late Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani, as evidenced by Bab Bin Ghesheer Court of First Instance, Commitments and Shari’ah Wills Department at the General People Committee for Justice in the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya dated 13.09.2010 G as per Order No. 360-2010, evidencing the death of late/ Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani on 15.09.1971 G.
His inheritance is limited to:
1. Mr. Al-Waleed Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani,
2. Mr. Ahmed Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani,
3. Mrs. Shaha Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani,
4. Mrs. Naoum Al-Doha Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani,
5. Heirs of late/ Badriah So'ad Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani, (His daughter), and her inheritance is limited to her above mentioned brothers.
6. Heirs of late/ Badi’ah Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani (His daughter), and her inheritance is limited to her above mentioned brothers.
7. Heirs of late/Nadeemah Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani (His daughter) and her inheritance is limited to her above mentioned brothers
8. Heirs of late/ Jameelah Abdullah Mohammad (his wife),
They are the same heirs of late/ Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani as above mentioned
9. Heirs of late/ Laila Naeema Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani,
Her death was evidenced on 25.06.1995G, and her inheritance is limited toher son Mustafa Jawad Zikri.
10. Mr./Mustafa Jawad Zikri
All the above named are of Saudi Nationality
11. Heirs of late/ Mariam Mai Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al Hood Al-Qarqani
Her death was evidenced on 08.03.2007G, and her inheritance is limited to her sons, namely:
12. Heirs of late/ Omar Abdul-Rahman Azzam:
13. Mr./Khalid Omar Abdul-Rahman Azzam,
14. Mrs. Fatima Omar Abdul-Rahman Azzam,
15. Mr. Omar Abdul-Rahman Omar Abdul-Rahman Azzam,
16. Mrs. Najlaa Omar Abdul-Rahman Azzam,
17. Mrs. Laila Omar Abdul-Fattah Azzam (his wife)
A the above named are of Egyptian Nationality
18. Heirs of Her Royal Highness Late/ Mona Bint Abdul-Rahman Bin Hasan Azzam,
Statement of the Heirs No. 1, as per Deed No. 101/1, dated 11.05.1435H. Her death was evidenced on 19 04.1435H. Her heirs are as follows:
19. HRH Prince Mohammad, Bin King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saad,
20. HRH Prince Amr Bin Mohammed Bin King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud,
21. HRH Princess Maha Bint Mohammad Bin King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud,
22. HRH Princess Reem Bint Mohammad Bin King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud
All the above named are of Saudi Nationality
23. Heirs of late/ Essam Abdul-Rahman Azzam (of Egyptian nationality) who has no children. His inheritance is limited to the above mentioned heirs.
Their elected domicile is the Law Office of Dr. Abdul- Haleem Mandoor, Attorney at the Courts of Cassation, located at 36, Rushdi Street, Abdeen District, Cairo, Arab Republic of Egypt.
1. Mr. Ahmed Abdullah Bin Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan, in his personal capacity, delegated Mr. Ahmed Abdul-Hayy Ghanem, the attorney, as per the Special Power of Attorney, issued at Rodh El-Faraj Notarization Office, dated 13.12.2014G, and in his capacity as the Agent of:
2. Heirs of late/ Khadijah Saleh Al-Fadhl (his wife)
Her inheritance is evidenced as per Deed of Inheritance, issued at Jeddah Court under No. 56/10, on 07.06.1427H, namely:
3. Mr. Abdulaziz Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
4. Heirs of late/ Dala’ Adil Abdul-Qader Qabbani
Her inheritance is evidenced as per Deed of Inheritance No. 776, issued at Jeddah Court on 29.07.1385H, and she was inherited by her brother as per the Deed of Inheritance No. 22/16, issued on 11.05.1431 H, Volume No. 1/16, issued at the General Court of Taif Governorate, and he is:
5. Mr. Mazen Bin Adil Bin Abdul-Qader Qabbani,
6. Heirs of late/ Fahad Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Harridan,
His inheritance is evidenced as per Shari'ah Deed No. 31/326/1, issued at Jeddah Court on 21.08.1420 H. The heirs are:
7. Shafia’ Saif Ahmed Abu Halail (his wife),
8. Mr. Abdullah Fahad Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
9. Mr. Zaid Fahad Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
10. Mrs. Sumayyah Fahad Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
11. Heirs of late/ Mohammad Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
His inheritance is evidenced as per Shari'ah Deed No. 35/13, issued at Jeddah Court on 25.02.1424 H, Volume No. 4/13. The heirs are:
12; Mrs. Hayat Yahya Abdullah Noori (his wife),
13. Mr. Salah Mohammad Abdullah Al-Solaiman,
14; Mrs. Khadijah Mohammad Abdullah Al-Solaiman,
15; Mrs. Laila Mohammad Abdullah Al-Solaiman,
Whose inheritance is evidenced as per Shari 'ah Deed No. 776, issued on 21.07.1385 H, and as per the Deed of Will No. 154/1/5, dated 25/08/1408 H. The heirs are:
16. Mr. Faisal Majed Mohammad Al-Solaiman,
17. Mrs. Sarah Majed Mohammad Al-Solaiman,
18. Heirs of late/ Khalid Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
Whose inheritance is evidenced as per Shari’ah Deed No. 51/12, issued at Jeddah Court, Volume No. 1/12, on 17/08/1427 H. The heirs are:
19. Mrs. Laila Ibrahim Abu Samrah (his wife),
20. Mr. Yazeed Khalid Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
21. Mr. Waleed Khalid Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
22. Mr. Tariq Khalid Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
23. Heirs of late/ Loulwa Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
Her inheritance was evidenced as per Deed No. 88/136/15, issued at Jeddah Court on 12.07.1411 H. The heir are:
24. Mrs. Ruqayyah Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
25. Heirs of late/ Mohammad Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed
His inheritance was evidenced as per Deed of Inheritance No. 237414071175310427, issued at Jeddah General Court on 25.10.1431 H. The heirs are:
26. Mrs. Asma’ Bint Abdullah Mohammad Al-Rasheed (his wife),
27. Mr. Bandar Bin Mohammad Bin Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
28. Mr. Sultan Mohammad Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
29. Mr. Majed Bin Mohammad Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
30. Mrs. Nada Bint Mohammad Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
31. Mrs. Basmah Bint Mohammad Abdul-Rahman Al-Rasheed,
32. Heirs of late/ Madhawi Bint Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
Whose inheritance after her father, late/Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan, is evidenced as per Shari’ah Deed No. 776, issued on 29.07.1385 H, and her inheritance is evidenced as per Deed No. 3470745, issued on 09.08.1434 H. The heirs are:
33. Mrs. Munawwar Ateeq Mohammad Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
34. Mrs. Fattoum Ateeq Mohammad Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
35. Heirs of late/ Asma' Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan
Whose inheritance after her father. late/Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan, is evidenced as per Shari ah Deed No. 776, issued on 29'07 1385 H., and her inheritance is evidenced as per Deed No. 8/262/1, issued at Jeddah Court on 29.01.1416 H. The heirs are:
36. Mr. Hamad Bin Saad Bin Hamad Al-Solaiman,
37. Mrs. Basmah Hashim Saeed Hashim,
38. Mrs. Fatimah Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
Whose inheritance after her father, is evidenced as per Deed No. 776, issued on 29.07.1385H.
39. Mrs. Hind Bint Abdullah Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan,
Whose inheritance after her father, is evidenced as per Deed No. 776, issued on 29.07.1385H. All of the are of Saudi Nationality
They are all residing in the Building of Sheikh/ Abdullah Al- Sulaimn Al-Hamdan, Al-Ikhlass Street, Al-Hamra District, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Their elected domicile is the Office of Dr. Abdul-Haleem Mandoor, Attorney at Courts of Cassation, located at 36, Rushdi Street, Abdeen, Cairo, Arab Republic Egypt.
(First Party - Claimants)
AGAINST
Second: Chevron Entities (Chevron Company of USA. Chevron Saudi Arabia and Aramco), having their main offices at 6001, Bolinga Road. Canyon San Romano, CA, 94583. 2324, United State of America, represented by Mr. Carry H. Andreas, in his capacity as Assistant Secretary and legally authorized, having their elected domicile at the Law Office of Al-Ebrashi and Co., located at the 4th Floor, 4, Al-Sadd Al-Aali Street, Dokki District, Cairo - 12311, Arab Republic of Egypt, and the Office of Zulfaqqar & Co. for Legal Consultancy and Advocacy, located at the 8th Floor, the Southern Tower, Nile City Towers, 2005 (A), Nile Cornice, Ramlat Bolaq, Cairo, Egypt.
(Second Party - Respondents)
Subject Title Deed No. 124, Volume 2 of 1368H, stipulates:
The land, the subject mailer of this sale luis become a pure ownership and right for each of Their Excellencies/ Abdullah and Hamad Bin Al-Solaiman Al-Hamdan and Khalid Abu Al-Waleed Al-Qarqani, provided that three- qu arters (3/4) of such land shall he owned by each of Their Excellencies Sheikh" Abdullah and Sheikh/ Hamad Al-Solaiman Al- Hamdan, and the fourth quarter shall he for Khalid Abu Al-Waleed. They shall have the right to act on their respective land as owners of the same without anyone objecting or disputing them in that regard....."
"The Government hereby grants the Company the absolute right, for a period of sixty (60) years, as of the effective date hereof, to investigate, explore, drill, extract, process, manufacture, transport, handle, take and export oil, asphalt, natural greases, wax and other carbonic fluids and extracts of all such products, in connection with the area specified in the Annex of this Agreement".
Such Agreement was called "Concession Agreement for Oil Extraction".
"Against the good compensation that would be paid to us, we, the undersigned, as per our ownership right under Deed No. 154/8, of the plots of land stated thereof, we hereby grant and transfer, each for himself and for his heirs, guardians and lawful representatives, to the Arab American Oil Company, referred to in subjed Deed, or its successors and whoever it appoints, the right to use and occupy said plots of land for the purposes of the Saudi Arabian Concession, dated 4th Safar 1352H that corresponds to, 29th July 1933G, and any additional agreements to be annexed thereto. We, hereby, declare and prove that the rights of the said Company to use and occupy subject land arise in accordance with Article 25 of the said Concession, and we hereby also agree to safeguard the said Company, its successors and whoever it appoints against all claims, whether in the past, present or in future, against anyone claiming title or interest in any of the said plots of land".
(This was signed by each of Khalid Abu Al-Waleed, Hamad Al-Solaiman and Abdullah Al-Solaiman).
Consequently, the owners of the land, the subject matter of Deed of Sale No. 124, have become Sheikh/ Abdullah Al-Solaiman at three- quarters (3/4) and Khalid Abu Al-Waleed at one-quarter (1/4).
"The Saudi Government authorizes the Arab American Oil Company (Standard Oil of California) to obtain from the owner of the land, the surface rights of the land that the Company believe in the need of using them in the project related works provided that the Company shall pay to the occupant of the land an amount for assigning the use of such lands. As for the amount to be paid to such occupant, it shall be fair and based on the benefit the occupant obtains from such land. The Government shall extend to the Company all possible assistance in case of any difficulties arising from obtaining the rights of the occupant of the land surface...."
However, the Claimants received no response from any concerned authority in that regard, a matter that made them resort to this arbitration in execution of Article 31 of the Concession Agreement, concluded on 29th July 1933G.
In the same letter. Chevron Company and its entities, as a precautionary measure, nominate Dr. Mohammad Abdul-Wahab, of Egyptian Nationality, as an arbitrator on their behalf, and that his address is 8th Floor, the Southern Tower, Nile City Towers, and Dr. Abdul Wahab.
On the same date, the international Arbitration Center sent a letter to Dr. Mohammad Salah Abdul-Wahab and Mr. Mohammad Arsheed Aldeiri with the same content of above mentioned letter that was sent to them by Dr. Hamdy Abdul- Rahman Ahmed, the Umpire.
The Panel discussed the issue of joining Dr. Abu Al-Ela Ali Abu Al-Nimr in the Arbitration Panel in replacement of the Legal Consultant, Abdul-Nasir Mohammad Abdul-Hameed Khattab, who withdrew from considering the existing Arbitration. Mr. Mohammad Arsheed Aldeiri, the Arbitrator appointed by the Claimants, accepted the appointment of such replacement Arbitrator whereas Dr. Hamdy Abdul-Rahman Ahmed, the Umpire (after a period of deliberations for more than one (1) hour and ten minutes) objected to this appointment. The Arbitrator appointed by the Claimants asked the Umpire not to issue the award because a new member had joined the Panel, and such member should hear the argument, and asked him to open the door for argument in a subsequent Hearing in order for the new member to hear the argument in the Case in accordance with the established litigation procedures whether before arbitration panels or judicial bodies, as it is legally established that the person who has heard the argument would issue the award. However, the Umpire refused such request and insisted that he would issue the award. In that regard, he relied, as established in the transcript of the Hearing of 18.05.2015G, on the notice submitted by the International Arbitration Center as being sent by the Legal Consultant, Abdul- Nasir Mohammad Abdul-Hameed Khattab, which notice was unclear and that he had the right to solely issue the award in accordance with the Arbitration Agreement provided for under Article 31 of the Agreement concluded in 1933G. He also held on the fact that he had already prepared the award and the reasoning thereof in four (4) pages only, to which the Arbitrator appointed by the Claimants reviewed. At the end of the meeting, the Umpire declared that he had fulfilled his assignment and left the premises of the International Arbitration Center without legally delivering the Award to the management of the International Arbitration Center, as he did not draft a legal filing transcript for the delivery of the award.
"In case any doubt, controversy or difference arise between the Government and the Company, as to the execution of this Agreement or the interpretation or implementation of any provision thereof, or in relation thereto, or in connection with the rights or responsibilities of either Party, and the two Parties fail to agree on a settlement by another means, the Case shall be referred to two (2) arbitrators, one to be selected by each Party, and one Umpire shall be selected jointly by the two arbitrators, before proceeding with the arbitration. Each Party shall appoint its Arbitrator within a period of thirty (30) days as of the date of being so requested in writing by the other Party. If the two (2) arbitrators fail to agree on appointing the Umpire, then the Government and the Company shall jointly appoint such umpire. If the Government and the Company fail to agree on the umpire, then they shall ask the President of the Permanent International Court of Justice to appoint the umpire. The award to be given by the two (2) Arbitrators in the Case shall be conclusive However, in case they fail to agree on an award, then the award to be given by the Umpire in the Case shall be final. As for the venue of arbitration, the two (2) Parties shall agree on such place. If they fail to so agree, then Arbitration shall be conducted in La Hague (Netherlands) ".
■ The First Petroleum Agreement signed between the Saudi Government and Standard Oil of California Company dated 29th Julyl933G.
■ The Title Contract of the plot of land - subject matter of the dispute - that proves the ownership of the Principals of the Claimants. It is the Deed (Registered Contract) No. 124, Volume 2 of 1368H.
■ A letter dated 04.05.1388H issued by the Arab American Oil Company in which it explicitly declare that the land, subject of the Deed No. 124, Volume 2 of 1368H, had been leased from their owners Khalid Abu Al-Waleed and late Hamad and Abdullah Al-Solaiman, throughout the term of the Concession Agreement.
■ A letter dated 26.05.1388H issued by the Arab American Oil Company that includes an acknowledgement of leasing the land, subject of the Deed, (Contract) No. 124, the subject matter of the dispute.
■ A letter dated 05.02.1389H issued by the Arab American Oil Company to the heirs of Al-Solaiman, that includes an acknowledgement of leasing the land, subject matter of the Deed No. 124., that is the subject matter of the dispute.
■ A letter dated 05.03.1389H issued by the Arab American Oil Company, that includes an acknowledgement of leasing the land, subject matter of the Deed No. 124., that is the subject matter of the dispute.
■ A letter dated 03.11.139. H issued by the Arab American Oil Company and addressed to the heirs of Al-Solaiman, the Claimants, declaring that it is leasing the land, the subject matter of dispute, which is owned by those heirs.
■ A letter dated 23rd Ramadan 1407 H sent by the Company, the Respondents, to the Heirs of the Claimants, declaring that it is leasing the land owned by the Heirs, subject of the Deed No 124, Volume 2 of 1368H, the land subject matter of the dispute.
■ The transcript of the Trespasses Removal Committee that reports to the Eastern Province Administration in the Ministry of Interior, dated 15.05.1414H in which such Committee stated that the land, the subject matter of dispute, is owned by the Heirs of Al-Solaiman, and is leased to Aramco Company. This transcript is signed by a representative of Al-Solaiman Heirs and a representative of Aramco Company.
■ A letter dated 13.04.1417H issued by the Governor of the Eastern Province that is addressed from the Crown Prince, Deputy Premier, stating the ownership of the land, the subject matter of dispute, by the Al- Solaiman family and that such land is leased to Aramco Company.
■ An undated letter, sent from Aramco Company to Sheikh/ Abdulaziz Abdullah Al- Solaiman, one of the Heirs of Abdullah Al-Solaiman, the Principal of the Claimants, in which it declares that it is leasing the plot of land owned by the Heirs of Al-Solaiman. In this letter, Aramco Company stated the following: 'Aramco Company showed no tolerance in defending its right as Lessee and your right as Lessors".
■ An undated letter, addressed by Aramco Company to the Principal of the Claimants, stating its approval to lease the land, the subject matter of the dispute, from its Owners, the Heirs of the Claimants.
■ An undated letter issued from Aramco Company to the Heirs of Abdullah Al- Solaiman, declaring that the land, the subject matter of dispute, is leased to the company by its Owners, Principals of the Claimants, namely: Late/ Abdullah Al-Solaiman, late/ Hamad Al-Solaiman and late/ Khalid Abu Al- Waleed.
■ On 05.07.1376H, a judgment was passed in the Case No. 497 dated 05.07.1376H, deciding that: "The land, subject matter of the Deed No. 124 dated 23.09.1368 is owned by Bin Solaiman & Partners and it is leased to Aramco Co. ".
■ A letter dated 24th Safar 1407H sent from Aramco Company to the Heirs of the Claimants, declaring thereby that the Claimants are the owners of the land, the subject matter of dispute, as per Deed No. 124, dated 20th Ramadan 1368H.
■ The final Judgment No. 171/200/20, issued on 18.07.1407H establishing that the land, subject matter of dispute, is a pure ownership of Heirs of Abdullah Al-Solaiman, in the Estate Division Case, filed by the Heirs of Hamad Al-Solaiman.
■ The order issued from His Royal Highness, late/ Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the Crown Prince, Minister of Interior, and Deputy Premier of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as per Cable No. 32346, dated 22.03.1433H, circulated to three Governmental Departments, to instruct Aramco Company to pay the delayed rental payment since the expiry of the Concession Agreement, and to handover the land to the Heirs of the Claimants or to compensate them.
■ The Claimants also submitted several documents supporting the value of compensation they claim for failure to hand them over the land they own, the subject matter of dispute. These documents are as follows:
■ A scientific study, prepared by Saudi banks, estimating the growth of the land value in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at a rate ranging between 7% and 9% annually to the last ten (10) years. The documents are prepared in the English language.
■ A letter for agricultural land expropriation representing a case similar to the Case of the land owned by the Claimants.
■ A letter dated 22.03.1433H sent from the Minister of Petroleum to His Majesty the King of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, admitting the ownership of the land, the subject matter of dispute, by Al-Solaiman family and stating compensating them for the non recovery of the land would cost the State Billions of Riyals.
■ A set of letters of various dates, sent from the Claimants to Aramco Company and to several concerned authorities in the Kingdom claiming the rental value of the land, subject matter of the existing dispute, and requesting compensation for non-recovery of the land, as Owners thereof, these are:
• A letter to His Excellency the Minister of Petroleum, dated 07.02.1428H.
• A letter to His Royal Highness Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz, Minister of Interior, Deputy Premier and Second Deputy of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia dated 07.04.2011G.
• A letter sent to His Royal Highness Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz, Minister of Interior, Deputy Premier and Second Deputy of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia dated 08.01.2012G.
• A letter sent to His Royal Highness Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz, Minister of Interior, Deputy Premier and Second Deputy of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, dated 26.04.2012G.
■ Reports prepared by real estate experts in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, submitted by the Claimants to the International Arbitration Center on 07.03.2015G. True copies of such reports were delivered to the selected domicile of the Claimants in Cairo, and the Respondents were notified of such reports on 11.03.2015G by express mail (DHL), in connection with the evaluation of the rental value (per square meter) of the land, subject matter of this dispute. Such reports were submitted in a file of documents to the Arbitration Panel in its Hearing held on 28.03.2015G.
■ Reports prepared by real estate experts in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia submitted by the Claimants to the International Arbitration Center on 07.05.2105G. Such reports were delivered to the selected domicile of the Respondents in Cairo, and they were notified thereof on 11.03.2015G by express mail company (DHL), w ith regard to the evaluation of the price per square meter of the land, subject matter of dispute. Such reports were submitted in a documents file to the Arbitration Panel at the Hearing of 28.03.2015G.
■ A plan of the location showing the boundaries of the plots of land, subject matter of dispute,
■ A "Fatwa" (Shari’ah opinion) issued by "Dar Al-Ifta" (House of Legal Opinions), in the Arab Republic of Egypt, addressing the Lease Relationship under Islamic Shari’ah, dated 02.06.1998G submitted to the International Arbitration Center on 19.03.2015G. Such document was delivered to the Respondents at their selected domicile in Cairo, and they were notified accordingly on 21.03.2015G, by express mail (DHL).
■ Elements of the Lease Contract of the land, subject matter of dispute and a receipt of rental value payment covering the period during which the land was leased to Aramco Co. by the Principal of the Claimants.
■ Details of the Seaport of Ras Tanourah which is located inside the land, subject matter of dispute.
■ Volume of the Saudi oil out of the total volume of international oil.
First:
Binding the company, the Respondents, jointly with their successors to pay a sum of SR. 35,896,500,000 (Thirty-Five Billion Eight Hundred Ninety-Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Saudi Riyals) as compensation for the value of the land, the subject matter of dispute, which area amounts to 39,885,000 m² (Thirty-Nine Million Eight Hundred Eighty-Five Thousand Square Meters) for the impossibility of handing over the land to the Claimants.
Second:
Binding the Respondents jointly with their successors to pay a sum of SR. 3,589,650,000 (Three Billion Five Hundred Eighty-Nine Million and Six Hundred-Fifty Thousand Saudi Riyals) per annum as compensation against the rental value of the right of use (usufruct) since the 2005G, being the date of expiry of the Contract until the complete execution. Accordingly, the total value of ten (10) years would be SR. 35,896,500,000 (Thirty-Five Billion Eight Hundred Ninety-Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Saudi Riyals)
Third:
Binding the Respondents jointly with their successors to pay a sum of SR. 3,589,650,000 (Three Billion Five Hundred Eighty-Nine Million Six Hundred-Fifty Thousand Saudi Riyals) per annum. Accordingly, the total value for ten (10) years would be SR. 35,896,500,000 (Thirty-Five Billion Eight Hundred Ninety-Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Saudi Riyals) as compensation against the usufruct of a part of the land totaling 3,200,000 m² (Three Million Two Hundred Thousand Square Meters) representing the area of Ras Tanourah Seaport. This is the part which was for sure exploited of the land since the Year 1949G, the date of the Lease Contract until the complete execution since the Lease Contract did not provide for granting the Respondents the power to exploit the land.
Fourth:
Binding the Respondents jointly with their successors to pay a sum of SR 1000,000,000 (One Billion Saudi Riyals) as compensation against the physical and moral damages incurred.
Fifth:
The invalidity of any action carried out based on the fact of the Company’s existence on the land since the date of the Lease Contract until the complete execution.
Sixth:
The enforcement of the award, with all its elements, against the successors of the Respondents.
Seventh:
Binding the Company - the Respondents - to pay all arbitration and legal fees.
■ On 05.07.2014G, Al-Ebrashi & Co. Law Firm submitted a defense brief for the Respondents. Under such brief, it objected to the admissibility of the claims and the competence of the Arbitration Panel that would be selected in accordance with the appointment notice issued on 05.07.2014G. Said Office relied, in such defense, on the fact that the notices sent to the Respondents did not specify who are the Claimants in such Arbitration, and objected also to the fact that the Claimants used the letterhead of the International Arbitration Center in their correspondence. It requested the said Center to confirm that it is neutral, independent and is not favoring either Party of the dispute. The Respondents’ defiance also confirmed in its brief that the notices it received did not specify the alleged contractual rights and failed to produce any supporting evidence. The Respondents' defense added that no contact information was provided w ith regard to the Claimants or their legal advisors and also the Claimants did not send Chevron Entities any request for arbitration giving the causes therefore. The Respondents' defense further indicated that the Claimants did not provide, with the notices, neither the Concession Agreement of 03.05.1933G nor the alleged Lease Contract. The Respondents' defense objected as well to involving Chevron Entities in any arbitration agreement with those Claimants, and added that no agreement was reached as to the place or language of arbitration, or the rules to be applied. The Respondents’ defense stated that Chevron Entities were never, at any time, a party in any disputes.
The defense of the Respondents added, in item No. 9 of the above mentioned brief, under the title "Appointment of an Arbitrator".. that Chevron Entities, as a precautionary measure, nominates Prof. Mohammad Abdul- Wahab as Arbitrator, and stated his address, electronic mail and phone numbers.
Such brief was signed by a person called "Mohammad Madkoor".
■ On 21.08.2014G, Zulfaqqar & Co. Legal Consultants and Advocates sent a letter to the International Arbitration Center, signed by Dr. Mohammad Salah El-Deen Abdul-Wahab, the Arbitrator appointed for the Respondents, "Chevron Entities", and agreed to be appointed as Arbitrator for the Respondents and asked the International Arbitration Center to provide some clarifications. These are:
- Clarifying the procedural rules and the subjective law applicable to the dispute.
- Sending the Arbitration Notice and the attachments thereof, in addition to any answer submitted by the Respondents, stating the language and place of arbitration and clarifying whether Dr. Ahmad Sadiq Al- Qushairy agreed to be appointed as arbitrator for the Claimants.
- On 31st August 2014, Zulfaqqar & Co. Legal Consultants and Advocates sent a letter to the International Arbitration Center, signed by Dr. Mohammad Salah Eldeen Abdul-Wahab, the Arbitrator appointed for the Respondents, stating that he was in the process of reviewing the notice sent to him by the International Arbitration Center and that he would notify this Center of the appointment of the Umpire in due course, after coordination with Dr. Ahmad Sadiq Al-Qushairy, the Arbitrator appointed by the Claimants.
The defense of the Respondents did not provide any documents.
"In consideration of the good compensation to be paid to us. we the undersigned, for our property under the Deed No. 154/8, for the plots of land set forth above, each of us, in his personal capacity and on behalf of his heirs, guardians and lawful representatives, hereby grant and transfers to the Arab American Oil Company, referred to in the Deed above, its successors and whomever it appoints, the right to use and occupy the plots of land mentioned above,for all the purposes of the Saudi Arabian Concession Agreement, dated 4th Safar 1352H that corresponds to 29th July 1933G, and any other agreements to be annexed thereto. We hereby further declare and state that the rights of the Company (the Arab American Company) to use and occupy the said plots of land arise pursuant to Article 25 of the said Concession Agreement..."
"Since the Arab American Oil Company has started its second century, it has become one of the leading companies in the United States of America, and it owns the Trademark "Chevron" which has become famous and reputable worldwide, and Chevron Company, by the year 1993, has become the first major western oil company".
"On Wednesday that corresponds to 15th October 2014G, we Chevron Corporation, a corporation established in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware. United States of America (Principal),operating in the field of energy in the United States of America,with its head office located at 6001,Bolinga Canyon San Romano Road,CA. 94583 2324, United State of America, represented by Mr.Garry H. Andreas, in his capacity as Assistant Secretary, legally authorized to produce this power of attorney, hereby constitute and authorize Mr. Ashraf Hassan Zaki Al-Ebrashi. Mr. Mohammad Yasir Jadallah, Mr Mohammad Ahmed Hani Madkoor, Mrs. Deemiah Ziyad Abdul-Fallah Haijer, Mrs.Deemah Tariq Mohammad Al-Janzouri and Mr. Hatim HassanTulbah Mohammed, with (heir office located at 4. Al-Sadd Al-A'aliStreet, Al-Dokki, Guiza 12311, Egypt, jointly or severally,to represent the Principal and to attend, on its behalf, in the Arbitration Case filed by Al-Qarqani and others against Aramco.Chevron, Chevron Saudi Arabia and others.... ".
The First: Chevron Entities explicitly admitted that they are a genuine party in the existing Arbitration because issuing the power of attorney in favor of attorneys to represent them and to attend on their behalf in this Arbitration Case only means that such entities declare and admit that they are a genuine party to the said Arbitration Case, because according to the well established principles in litigation in arbitration, it is impermissible to interfere with or include in arbitration, and attending in Arbitration Case is exclusively limited to the parties subject to the arbitration clause, and the term "Chevron Entities", as clarified previously by the Arbitration Panels, are Chevron of USA, Chevron Saudi Arabia and Aramco.
The Second: Such power of attorney assigns attorneys to attend in the said Arbitration Case and to plead for Chevron Entities, including Aramco, Chevron of USA, Chevron Saudi Arabia, as. per the wording of the said power of attorney because such case is tiled against them all
"If the two parties to the arbitration fail to agree on the supervisory rules applicable to the subject matter of dispute, then the Arbitration Panel shall apply the objective rules in the law which it deems most relevant to the subject matter of dispute.... "
"If there is more than one judge, then deliberations on passing the judgments should be confidential. Except for the provision of Article 62 of this Law, deliberations should be conducted only among the judges who heard the argument".
"If the defendant fails to submit a written answer containing his defense, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 30 of the said Law, then the Arbitration Panel should continue in the arbitration procedures unless the two Parties to the arbitration agree otherwise. If either Party fails to attend a Hearing, after notifying him, or fail to submit the documents required from him, then the Arbitration Panel may continue the procedures of arbitration and give an award in the dispute relying on the supporting elements available to the Panel".
"The provisions of this Law do not apply to disputes relating to family affairs and issues in respect of which reconciliation may not be made
"In consideration of the good compensation to be paid to us, we the undersigned, for our property under the Deed No. 154/8, for the plots of land set forth above, each of us, in his personal capacity and on behalf of his heirs, guardians and lawful representatives, hereby grant and transfers to the Arab American Oil Company, referred to in the Deed above, its successors and whomever it appoints, the right to use and occupy the plots of land mentioned above, for all the purposes of the Saudi Arabian Concession Agreement, dated 4th Safar 1352H that corresponds to 29th July 1933G, and any other agreements to be annexed thereto. We hereby further declare and state that the rights of the Company to use and occupy the said plots of land arise pursuant to Article 25 of the said Concession Agreement and we hereby also agree to safeguard the said Company, its successors and whomever it appoints against all claims, whether in the past present time or in future, by anyone claiming interest in any of the said plots of land"
First: The Arbitration Panel has the competence to consider this Arbitration Case.
Second: The Respondents are hereby committed to pay to the Claimants a sum of SR 33,902,250,000 (Thirty-Three Billion Nine Hundred Two Million and Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Saudi Riyals) as compensation for the non-recovery of the plots of land totaling an area of 39,885,000 m² (Thirty-Nine Million Eight Hundred Eighty-Five Square Meters).
Third: The Respondents are hereby committed to pay to the Claimants a sum of SR 33,390,225,000 (Thirty-Three Billion Three Hundred Ninety Million Two Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Saudi Riyals) as rental value due and payable by the Respondents to the Claimants since the year 2005 G. until the date of giving this Award.
Fourth: Rejection of the Third Claim stated in the final defense brief of the Claimants.
Fifth: Rejection of the Fourth Claim stated in the final defense brief of the Claimants.
Sixth: Non-acceptance of the Fifth Claim stated in the final defense brief of the Claimants.
Seventh: Rejection of the Sixth Claim stated in the final defense brief of the Claimants.
Eight: The Claimants and the Respondents are committed to equally share the arbitration fees, assessed at one-eighth percent (1/8 %) of the total value of the Claims of the Claimants.
Ninth: Each of the Claimants and the Respondents is committed to bear their respective attorney’s fees.
Tenth: Rejection of all other claims.
Already registered ?