This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.
Procedural Background and Disputed Issues
This Procedural Order No. 3 addresses disputes arising during the document production phase in the ICSID arbitration between Ricardo Machado and the Republic of Angola. The order resolves two primary issues: (i) the Respondent's outstanding requests for document production, and (ii) the Claimant's application to disregard and strike paragraphs from the Respondent's document production submission on the grounds that it breached procedural rules.
The Claimant argued that the Respondent's submission, particularly its 18-page introduction, constituted an unauthorized pleading that misused the reply function of the Armesto Schedule, exceeded word limits, and improperly argued the merits. The Respondent countered that its submission was a necessary response to the Claimant's own lengthy introduction, which had introduced new factual allegations and exhibits, and that procedural formalities should not override its right to fully exercise its defense.
The Tribunal's Analysis and Orders
The Tribunal found that both parties had misused the document production phase to raise allegations not contemplated by the Procedural Calendar. It acknowledged that the Respondent's introduction exceeded the typical purpose of a cover letter. However, because the Claimant had also submitted a lengthy document to provide “context” for its objections, the Tribunal determined there was no basis to disregard the Respondent's reply or strike it from the record. Consequently, the Claimant's request was denied.
Regarding the substantive document requests, the Tribunal ruled on each of the Respondent's requests as detailed in Annex A to the Order. The Tribunal clarified that its analysis of relevance and materiality was conducted on a prima facie basis and did not prejudge any final determination on the merits. The operative part of the decision directs that all documents ordered for production, along with non-objected documents, must be produced by 19 March 2026. For certain requests where no responsive documents exist (Nos. 19, 20, 23, and 25), the Tribunal ordered the Claimant's counsel to submit a sworn statement to that effect within 10 days. The Tribunal also reminded the parties that documents are not considered part of the record until formally submitted in accordance with the established procedural rules.
