1) Have the Conoco Parties and Venezuela had any contact regarding the enforcement of the Award? What enforcement actions (if any) did the Conoco Parties take after the Award was rendered until enforcement was stayed by the Secretary-General of ICSID upon registration of the Application for Annulment? What are the prospects of enforcing the Award outside the United States?
2) Can any non-compliance be directly linked to economic difficulties and/or the US sanctions? Is this relevant for purposes of the Committee's decision on whether to maintain or lift the stay of enforcement of the Award?
3) What would be the specific prejudice of deferring enforcement of the Award to a later date having regard to Venezuela's alleged refusal or inability to honour any award presently and to the freezing of its assets in the US? Are there other creditors that enjoy priority of payment over the Conoco Parties?
4) What steps have the Conoco Parties taken to obtain such license and what is the likelihood that they may be granted one soon? What effect, if any, can have such sanctions on the Conoco Parties' ability to return any funds paid on the Award if annulled? Would the Conoco Parties be willing to give an undertaking that all amounts recovered as a result of enforcement actions will be placed in escrow or with a trustee that is not subject to the sanctions for the duration of the annulment proceedings?
5) What would be the precise impact of the Award's enforcement on Venezuela's State budget? What efforts, if any, has Venezuela taken to restructure its debt and how can this have an effect on Venezuela's ability to pay awards rendered against it?
6) What is the financial situation of the Conoco Parties at present? How does the outcome of this proceeding affect the Conoco Parties' accounts?
a) whether the application for annulment is submitted in good faith;
b) whether there is a risk of non-compliance of the challenged award by the applicant in the event the award is not annulled;
c) whether the balance of harms is in favor of the continuance of enforcement, namely whether termination of the stay would cause significant and irreparable injury to the award debtor and the award creditor would be prejudiced if the stay of enforcement continues pending a decision on annulment.14
Churchill Mining Plc and Planet Mining Pty Ltd v. Republic of Indonesia, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/14 and 12/40, Decision on the Request for Continued Stay of Enforcement of Award, 27 June 2017, ¶ 34; Tenaris S.A. and Talta -Trading e Marketing Sociedade Unipessoal Lda v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/11/26, Decision on the Request to Maintain the Stay of Enforcement of the Award, 24 March 2017, ¶ 74 [hereinafter Tenaris I].
Flughafen Zürich A.G. and Gestion e Ingeniera IDC S.A. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/19, Decision of the ad hoc Committee on Stay of Enforcement of the Award, 11 March 2016, ¶ 66 (A/CLA-7) [hereinafter Flughafen]. See also ICJ: Dispute Regarding Navigational and Related Rights, 2009, ¶ 150, n° A/RLA-23 and Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, 2010, ¶ 278, n° A/RLA-24.
Déjà enregistré ?