Interocean Oil v. Nigeria

The Tribunal has carefully considered the Parties' respective arguments concerning Claimants' letter of 8 April 2016 addressing document production, including Respondent's reply of 15 April 2016. In this connection, the Tribunal has continued to be guided by the 2010 IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration, which permit the Tribunal to order production of documents relevant to the case and material to its outcome, and not subject to valid objections that include inter alia privilege and unreasonable burden.

Although decisions already taken should not be revisited without some showing of good cause, the Tribunal finds no authority for the proposition that its prior directions on document production, contained in the Order of 17 February 2016, bear any res judicata effect.

Having taken into account principles of procedural economy and proportionality, the Tribunal decides as follows, with reference to the requests as numbered in Claimants' Redfern Schedule and its Order of 17 February 2016.

1. For Requests Nos. 4 and 11, the Tribunal finds no reason to doubt Respondent's confirmation with respect to responsive documents. No modification or adjustment is warranted to the Order of 17 February 2016.

2. For Requests Nos. 5 and 9, the Tribunal has been persuaded of the potential pertinence to this case of events in 2006, and thus expands the scope of document search to material created as far back as July 2005.

3. For Request No. 8, the Tribunal notes the narrowed scope of the earlier request. The revised Request of 8 April 2016 is hereby granted except that it is further limited to material arising from enquiries made by Mr. Jacques Jones, not to include either (i) enquiries by third parties or (ii) “specific interaction” rather than to enquiries.

The Parties shall confer on an appropriate timetable for production, providing the Tribunal with a status report not later than seven (7) calendar days from issuance of this Procedural Order.