Omega Engineering LLC & Oscar Rivera v.
Republic Of Panama
ICSID Case No. ARB/16/42
Claimants' Opening Statement
February 24, 2020
[Page 2]
[Page 3]
Oscar I. Rivera
100% Ownership
Omega U.S.
[Page 4]
(C-0615)
[Page 5]
Oscar I. Rivera
100% Ownership
Goodwill
Omega U.S.
Intangible Assets
Omega Panama
Omega Consortium
[Page 6]
Claimants' Investment
[Page 7]
Claimants' Investment
Mr. Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
[Page 8]
Claimants' Investment
Mr. Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
Claimants'
Goodwill
[Page 9]
Claimants' Investment
Mr. Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
Claimants'
Goodwill
The Omega
Consortium
Contracts
[Page 10]
[Page 11]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
[Page 12]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
[Page 13]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
Herrera states, "Until I left my position as Director, in the summer of 2014, there were no major problems with the Omega Consortium's performance of the work"
(June 30, 2014)
Herrera ¶ 12
[Page 14]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
"I send you my greetings and congratulations on your hard work in carrying out your activities.
The National Institute of Culture (INAC), on whose behalf I am acting, wishes to deeply thank the Omega Consortium and the Sub-Contractors for the support provided for the dismantling and mobilization work carried out in the offices of the National Directorate of Historical Heritage (DNPH), the Administration of the Museum and Storage, located in the Reina Torres de Arauz Museum, to continue with the construction works on the Ciudad de las Artes Project.
We hope to be able to continue to count on your collaboration and support in any other activity required for the duration of the project."
(December 19, 2013)
C-0636
[Page 15]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
"INAC started withholding approval of payment applications"
(July 2014)
Buendia ¶ 18
[Page 16]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
"In the meeting held yesterday, September 24, 2014 with the of Legal Affairs Directorate of INAC, we informed them of the importance of responding to OMEGA regarding the Certificates of Partial Payment Nos. 13, 14 and 15, which were duly approved by INAC's Inspectors and the Comptroller General's Office. It was explained that the delay in this process is seriously affecting the cash flow of the Contractor.”
(September 24, 2014)
C-0593
[Page 17]
Contract Signed
(July 6, 2012)
[C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012]
Comptroller General's Endorsement
(Sept. 19, 2012)
[C-0042]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 1
(Sept. 27, 2012)
[C-0113: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Sept. 2012]
Order to Proceed with Work No. 2
(April 22, 2013)
[C-0150: Notice to Proceed for Contract No. 093-12 dated 22 Apr. 2013]
Letter from INAC
(Dec. 19, 2013)
[C-0636: Letter No. 098-13 from INAC to Omega dated 19 Dec. 2013]
Varela is Elected
(May 4, 2014)
Last Comptroller General Endorsed Payment to Omega
(June 2014)
[C-0286: CPP No. 12 dated 16 May 2014]
Varela Inauguration
(July 1, 2014)
MEF slashes Project budget by 80%
(Sept. 8, 2014)
[C-0067: 2015 Budget presented by Panama's National Assembly dated 8 Sept. 2014]
INAC orders Omega to continue working without pay
(Oct. 23, 2014)
[C-0595: Meeting minutes between Omega and INAC representatives dated 23 Oct. 2014 at #4]
INAC terminates the contract by administrative resolution
(Dec. 23, 2014)
[C-0044: Resolution No. 391-14 DG/DAJ from INAC dated 23 Dec. 2014]
President Varela's Cabinet approved the budget proposal.
(Mid-August 2014)
Zarak ¶ 8
"The MEF was aware that the Ciudad de las Artes Project was significantly behind schedule . . . . The Ciudad de las Artes Project was considered a high-risk project."
(September 2014)
Zarak ¶ 15
The INAC confirms intent to pay to Credit Suisse, not Omega
(March 15, 2015)
C-0606
[Page 18]
[Page 19]
[08/15/17 8:59:14 a.m.] Minister of Economy and Finance: President, the additional funds for the MINSA (Ministry of Health)in order to pay IBT's CNOs (No Objection Certificates) are 41.6 million and not 40, meaning I have to cut back 1.6 from another institution. Should I cut it back from the MOP (Public Works Ministry) or the ATP (Environmental, Territorial and Participative Policy)?
[08/15/17 8:59:50 a.m.] Jj: Mop
[08/15/17 9:00:05 a.m.] Jj: Give them less
[08/15/17 9:00:13 a.m.] Jj: We'll handle it later
C-0834: Chat with Dulcidio de la Guardia, then-Minister of Finance & Economy dated 24 Apr. 2017 through 12 Oct. 2018
[09/16/18 12:27:27 p.m.] +507 6616-4102: Another thing: I have a meeting with the Mexicans from Soho, they are coming on Tuesday, September 25. They say they will have the offer ready.
[09/16/18 12:36:26 p.m.] Jj: Ok, let's hold off on that
[09/16/18 12:36:26 p.m.] Jj: Until they ask for it
[09/16/18 12:36:46 p.m.] Jj: Raul Hernandez has been very disrespectful
[09/16/18 12:36:55 p.m.] Jj: But I do want to pay
[09/16/18 12:37:30 p.m.] Jj: They're friends
[09/16/18 12:37:30 p.m.] Jj: Hold on to it until they call
[09/16/18 12:37:34 p.m.] +507 6616-4102: Ok
C-0819: Chat with Eyda Varela de Chinchilla, then Panama's Minister of Economy & Finance dated 14 Sep. 2018 through 5 Oct. 2018
[Page 20]
[3/3/16, 7:43:47 PM] Nessim Barsallo: What's happening at the Comptroller [General's Office]?
[3/3/16, 7:43:54 PM] Nessim Barsallo: Is it a conspiracy?
[3/3/16, 7:58:16 PM] Frankie J. Lopez®: It looks like it
[3/3/16, 7:58:35 PM] Nessim Barsallo: I conclude they have orders
C-0681: WhatsApp message between Frankie Lopez and Nessim Barsallo dated 3 Mar. 2016
Cls' Rejoinder ¶ 269
[Page 21]
Frankie J. Lopez: Lo se [...] pero xndo pienso q todo esta resolviendose de repente se complica
["I know [...] but when I think everything is getting resolved suddenly it gets complicated"]
Nessim Barsallo: Q pasa en contraloria
["What's happening at the Comptroller [General's Office]"]
Nessim Barsallo: Es un complot?
["Is it a conspiracy?"]
Frankie J. Lopez: Pareciera
["It looks like it"]
Nessim Barsallo: Yo concluyo que tienen ordines
["I conclude they have orders"]
Frankie Lopez: Disq tan verificando en legal bla bla bla por el caso
["The say they're verifying in legal blah blah blah because of the case"]
...
Frankie J. Lopez: Tu cabes algo?
["Do you [know] anything"]
Frankie J. Lopez: Sabes*
["Know*"]
Nessim Barsallo: Eso es de presidencoa
["That comes from the Presidency"]325
C-0681: WhatsApp message between Frankie Lopez and Nessim Barsallo dated 3 Mar. 2016
See Cls' Reply ¶ 103
[Page 22]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
[Redacted]
C-0518: WhatsApp messages from Ana Graciela Medina to Oscar Rivera dated 17 Sept. 2012
| 46 | Inbox | From | [Redacted] Juan Carlos Varela* |
9/17/2012 11:49:27 PM (UTC + 0) |
Read | Hey, check WhatsApp Messenger for BlackBerry, Iphone, Android and Nokia. Download it from http://whatsapp.com/dl/ and say good bye to the SMS (Juan Carlos Varela) Source file: Oscar Rivera's iPhone/Library/SMS/sms.db: 0x1559C3 (Table: message, handle, Size; 2166784 bytes) |
| 47 | Inbox | From | [Redacted] Juan Carlos Varela* |
9/17/2012 11:43:58 PM (UTC + 0) |
Read | Hey, check WhatsApp Messenger for BlackBerry, Iphone, Android and Nokia. Download it from http://whatsapp.com/dl/ and say good bye to the SMS (Juan Carlos Varela) Source file: Oscar Rivera's iPhone/Library/SMS/sms.db: 0x155C67 (Table: message, handle, Size; 2166784 bytes) |
C-0519: Invitations from Mr. Varela to join WhatsApp chat dated 17 Sept. 2012
[Page 23]
8. Second, the evidence does not support the Claimants' allegations that they were targeted or harassed in any way. According to the Claimants, they were targeted because Mr. Rivera refused to make a campaign contribution to then-candidate (now President) Juan Carlos Varela in 2012. There is no credible evidence that this request ever happened. Although Mr. Rivera references this request in his witness statement, there is not a single contemporaneous email, letter, or document in evidence confirming his account. In addition, Panama's witnesses confirm that their respective ministries were never directed or asked to take any adverse actions against the Claimants.
Resp.'s Counter-Mem. ¶ 8
[Page 24]
[10/05/18 7:20:57 p.m.] Jj: But I never asked
[10/05/18 7:21:09 p.m.] Jj: Yes an attorney partner at igra
[10/05/18 7:21:14 p.m.] Jj: Invited me to dinner
[10/05/18 7:21:19 p.m.] Jj: I did not like the guy
[10/05/18 7:21:25 p.m.] Jj: But I never asked him again
C-0821: Chat with Kenia Porcell, then-Attorney General dated 16 Nov. 2017 to 5 Oct. 2018
[10/05/18 7:23:34 p.m.] Raul Sandoval: I don't even remember well who was there
[10/05/18 7:23:44 p.m.] Jj: Ana you I c
[10/05/18 7:30:08 p.m.] Raul Sandoval: I think Jordi, Cholito
C-0822: Chat with Raul Sandoval, President Varela's Private Secretary dated 5 Oct. 2018 to 6 Oct. 2018
[Page 25]
[10/05/18 7:21:25 p.m.] Jj: But I never asked him again
C-0821: Chat with Kenia Porcell, then-Attorney General dated 16 Nov. 2017 to 5 Oct. 2018
[Page 26]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
[C-0555]
ANA GRACIELA MEDINA
[Redacted]
May 20, 2015
[Redacted]
May 20, 2015
[Redacted]
May 20, 2015
C-0555: WhatsApp messages between Ana Graciela Medina and Frankie Lopez dated 20 May 2015
[Page 27]
[04/30/18 8:45:40 a.m.] Jj: Good morning attorney general
[04/30/18 8:46:04 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: Hello Sir
[04/30/18 8:46:14 a.m.] Jj: I call you
[04/30/18 8:50:49 a.m.] Jj: About RM kids for you to know, farah will call the prosecutor so that she may send to her the notification that the criminal jurisdiction was lifted. She needs that before notifying the lawyers.
The thing is that once she notifies the lawyers it will be difficult to refuse to deliver any copies
They will be part of a report with a folio and the law would force us do it. I could inform the pgn [Attorney General] but I don't know maybe you want to handle it?
[04/30/18 8:51:26 a.m.] Jj: She says the law obliges her
[04/30/18 8:53:59 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: 2 points:
- the notification of extradition
- the delivery of the copies
Meaning she should notify the extradition today and take her time for the copies request
[04/30/18 8:54:16 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: That's what Tania was talking about
[04/30/18 8:55:09 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: Do not deliver the copies today. Make RE take the legal time to deliver them.
[04/30/18 8:55:39 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: And this would allow delivering the extradition and avoiding they file an appeal to the vice
[04/30/18 8:55:47 a.m.] Kenia Porcell Privado: That's my opinion
C-0821: Chat with Kenia Porcell, then-Attorney General dated 16 Nov. 2017 to 5 Oct. 2018
[Page 28]
Claimants' Investment
Mr.
Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
Claimants'
Goodwill
The Omega
Consortium
Contracts
[Page 29]
From: Cruz, Nancy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 5:28 PM
To: Eduardo Marti-Martinez
Cc: Freitas-Pacciulli, Fatima; Delgado, Cesar D; Menendez, Eddie; Fulmer, Jacob
Subject: RE: OMEGA ENGIN RESTAURACION Y REHABILI
Eduardo,
At this point, due to the current declaration of default and the response time (30 days) required in Panama, we would not be in position to support bids for PR with the Panama outcome still unclear. The default on the largest job in Panama has the potential to put at risk both the Panama and PR operations if a resolution is not reached. Both companies could be at risk with this particular situation in Panama if the options to resolve do not involve a full release of Omega's obligations to the surety and the surety's obligations to the government. Until further notice, we will not be able support additional work in PR. We will keep you posted on our discussions with ASSA.
Regards,
Nancy Cruz | Managing Director/Construction Services | Bond & Specialty Insurance
Travelers
3230 W. Commercial Blvd. | Suite 390
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
W: 954.677.3374 F: 866.829.0379 C: 954.309.1064
C-0098: Email from Travelers Casualty & Surety Company to Omega-U.S. dated 9 Feb. 2015
[Page 30]
"Dear Mr. Rivera,
As per Article 1534 of the Civil Code and the Indemnity Documents which Omega Engineering, LLC and Omega Engineering, Inc. as members of the OMEGA CONSORTIUM, granted in favor of ASSA Compañía de Seguros, S.A. (hereinafter ASSA) as a condition precedent for ASSA to issue Performance Bond No. 85B64510 and Advance Payment Bond No. 87B50808 pertaining to Contract No. 93-12 for the purpose of carrying out the Studies, Design, Provision of Materials, Labor, Equipment, administration and Construction of the City of the Arts Project, hereby we request that OMEGA CONSORTIUM and/or any or all of its members provide a cash collateral in the sum of thirty-eight million dollars ($38,000,000.00) legal currency of the United States, corresponding to the amount of the bonded sums."
C-0382: Letter No. VPET-007-2015 from ASSA to the Omega Consortium dated 3 Mar. 2015
[Page 31]
Claimants' Investment
Mr.
Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
Claimants'
Goodwill
The Omega
Consortium
Contracts
[Page 32]
[C-0193]
NEWSROOM -PANAMA-
More seized bank accounts linked to suspended judge
[C-0194]
La Prensa In English
Prosecutor seizes accounts linked to Alejandro Moncada Luna
tvn Noticias Judicial
Fiscalía pide a Interpol que emita 'alerta roja' para ubicar a 4 empresarios por caso Moncada Luna
[C-0213]
La Prensa
MONCADA LUNA CASE
Accounts related to money laundering are seized
La Prensa / Locales
Cautelan cuentas ligadas a blanqueo
C-0193; C-0094; C-0194; C-0213; C-0732
[Page 33]
...
In addition, the list of the Office of the Prosecutor Specialized in counteracting Organized Crime includes the entrepreneurs Jorge Espino Méndez, Julián Paris Rodríguez, and Óscar Iván Rivera Rivera; all who conduct business with various state entities, among them the controversial National Aid Program (Spanish initials: PAN). . . .
'Each of these individuals is directly related to the accounts, or to companies who were involved in the mobilization of the funds, which ultimately were used for the acquisition of the apartments of Mr. Alejandro Moncada Luna and the personal accounts of Mr. Luna and his wife,' said the press release from the Prosecutor General's office."
C-0213: Accounts related to money laundering are seized, LA PRENSA dated 21 Jun. 2015
[Page 34]
Detention Order Issued
(Aug. 25, 2015)
[C-0093: Resolution of Detention No. 052-15 dated 25 Aug. 2015]
Red Notice Issued
(Aug. 28, 2015)
[C-0747: INTERPOL Red Notice Request from the Organized Crime Attorney's Office to Panamanian National Police dated 28 Aug. 2015]
Extradition Sought from the U.S.
(Dec. 21, 2015)
[C-0900: Letter from Panama's Foreign Affairs Ministry to Panama's Office of the Attorney General attaching the U.S. State Department's Denial of Panama's Request of a Provisional Arrest for the Purpose of Extraditing Mr. Rivera dated 29 Feb. 2016]
Extradition Denied by U.S.
(Feb. 29, 2016)
[C-0900: U.S. State Department's Denial of Panama's Request of a Provisional Arrest dated 29 Feb. 2016]
Money Laundering Case Nullified
(Sept. 23, 2016)
[C-0008: Judgment of Panama's Second Superior Tribunal for the First Judicial District dated 23 Sept. 2016]
Red Notice Cancelled after Being Contested
(Dec. 13, 2016)
[C-0220: Letter from the Commission for the Control of Interpol's Files dated 13 Dec. 2016]
Provisional Dismissal of Bribery Investigation Confirmed by the First Court of the Criminal Circuit of the First Judicial Circuit of Panama
(Nov. 26, 2018)
[C-0908: Provisional Dismissal No. 143 dated 26 Nov. 2018]
[Page 35]
Claimants' Investment
Mr. Rivera's
Experience
Expertise
Reputation
Claimants'
Goodwill
The Omega
Consortium
Contracts
[Page 36]
"The above omissions are clear and were duly proven in the case."
"In the proceedings, it was fully proven that the Claimant was not only not dedicated to operating vehicle inspection stations, but it also did not have any operations or employees."
"Consequently, it is obvious that Inceysa also presented false information concerning its own experience and capacity, thus violating, once again, one of the essential pillars that led El Salvador to award the bid to it."
- Inceysa v. El Salvador (CL-0067) ¶¶ 108, 109, 118
[Page 37]
"However, when allegations of corruption are raised, either as part of a claim or as part of a defense, the party asserting that corruption occurred must establish the corruption through clear and convincing evidence."
Submission of the United States of America dated 3 February 2020 ¶ 45
[Page 38]
"If, at the time of the initiation of the investment, there has been compliance with the law of the host state, allegations by the host state of violations of its law in the course of the investment, as a justification for state action with respect to the investment . . . could not deprive a tribunal acting under the authority of the BIT of its jurisdiction." Fraport (CL-0124) ¶ 345
"The Tribunal considers that a distinction has to be drawn between (1) legality as at the initiation of the investment . . . and (2) legality during the performance of the investment.” Hamester (RL-0006) ¶ 127
[Page 39]
"DECLARE the nullity of every act in the criminal proceedings officially initiated and based on accusations from members from the community, for the allegations of money laundering, against ... OSCAR IVÁN RIVERA, ID No. [Redacted]; as a result of violation of due process and errors related to general denomination of the crime." (C-0008)
"Based on the above considerations, we respectfully recommend to the Honorable Court that a ruling be issued ordering OBJECTIVE AND IMPERSONAL PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL ..." (C-0942)
"The United States cannot proceed with the provisional arrest request at this time, as it does not contain sufficient factual support linking Rivera Rivera to the money laundering charge." (C-0900)
[Page 40]
The Claimants paid bribes to Justice Moncada Luna in exchange for an award of the La Chorrera Contract. This conduct taints all of the Claimants’ investments in Panama and deprives the Tribunal of jurisdiction over their claims.
Reply in Support of Respondent's Preliminary Objections ¶ 6
61. In tandem with the overwhelming proof of the bank transfers that moved money from Omega to Justice Moncada Luna, and the fatal imperfections in the fake real estate documentation relied upon by the Claimants, the opinion of Mr. Pollitt further confirms the Claimants’ misconduct in connection with the La Chorrera Project.
Reply in Support of Respondent's Preliminary Objections ¶ 61
[Page 41]
61. In tandem with the overwhelming proof of the bank transfers that moved money from Omega to Justice Moncada Luna, and the fatal imperfections in the fake real estate documentation relied upon by the Claimants, the opinion of Mr. Pollitt further confirms the Claimants’ misconduct in connection with the La Chorrera Project.
Reply in Support of Respondent’s Preliminary Objections ¶ 61
|
Omega |
➔ |
PR |
➔ |
Ms. |
R-0062: Jorge Enrique Villalba, Preliminary Financial Analysis Report in Case No. 049-15 dated 05 June 2015 at p. 22
[Page 42]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
[C-0078 resubmitted]
PURCHASE AND SALE PROMISE AGREEMENT
The undersigned, namely, JR BOCAS INVESTMENTS, INC., an existing corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Panama, duly registered under the Merchant's Section of the Public Registry, on File 481908, Document 758532, represented herein by MARIA GABRIELA REYNA LOPEZ, female, from Panama, of legal age, neighbour of this city, holder of personal identification document No. [Redacted], duly authorized for this act, who shall hereinafter be referred to as THE SELLER OFFEROR, on the one hand and on the other, PUNELA DEVELOPMENT CORP., an existing corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Panama, duly registered under the Merchant's Section of the Public Registry, under [Redacted], represented herein by LUIS E. MONTANO G., male, from Panama, of legal age, neighbour of this city, holder of personal identification document No. [Redacted], duly authorized in this act, who shall be hereinafter referred to as the BUYER OFFEROR, have agreed to enter into, as in fact they do, This Purchase and Sale Promise Agreement, which is comprised of the following clauses:
ONE: The SELLER OFFEROR, proprietor of the Ranch No. 35050, registered under Document 1162972, Unification Code 7603, under the Real Property Section, Province of Los Santos, District of Tonosi, Corregimiento Canas from the Public Registry, which is made up of a plot of land with a surface of seven hectares, nine thousand and seventeen square meters, which measurements, borders and other data are registered with the Public Registry, which hereinafter is referred to as the RANCH.
TWO: The SELLER OFFEROR declares to commit to sell the BUYER OFFEROR and the latter commits to buy from the first one THE RANCH, in accordance with the price convened and adjusted of ONE MILLION AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100 ($1,000,000.00), legal tender of the United States of America, which The BUYER OFFEROR must pay to the SELLER OFFEROR in the following way:
- One initial payment of the twenty-five percent (25%) of the total price of the RANCH, that is to say, the amount of TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100 ($250,000.00), legal tender of the United States of America, which shall be payable within ten (10) days following the execution of this agreement. The payment above-described shall be paid through certified check or cashier's check in favour of the law firm Reyna & Asociados, which shall act as the Depository Agent custodian of the funds.
- A second payment for the amount of TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100, payable within sixty (60) business days from the first payment date.
- The amount of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100 ($[illegible]0,000.00) legal tender of the United States of America, payable once it is duly registered with the Public Registry of Notarial Deeds, part of the final purchase and sale agreement, through which the SELLER OFFEROR transfers the RANCH to the BUYER OFFEROR. In order to guarantee the payment of the remaining balance covered under "c" above, the BUYER OFFEROR shall make the payment of said balance through an Irrevocable Promise of Payment Letter, issued by a General Faculties local Bank, acceptable by the SELLER OFFEROR, which shall be delivered to the SELLER OFFEROR by the BUYER OFFEROR, within sixty (60) days following the execution of this contract.
THREE: The parties agree that both the BUYER OFFEROR and the SELLER OFFEROR commit to sign the pertaining Notarial Deed part of the purchase and sale agreement of the RANCH in favour of the BUYER OFFEROR within one hundred and eighty (180) days following the execution of this contract. This term may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties.
TWO: The SELLER OFFEROR declares to commit to sell the BUYER OFFEROR and the latter commits to buy from the first one THE RANCH, in accordance with the price convened and adjusted of ONE MILLION AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100 ($1,000,000.00), legal tender of the United States of America, which The BUYER OFFEROR must pay to the SELLER OFFEROR in the following way:
- One initial payment of the twenty-five percent (25%) of the total price of the RANCH, that is to say, the amount of TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND AMERICAN DOLLARS WITH 00/100 ($250,000.00), legal tender of the United States of America, which shall be payable within ten (10) days following the execution of this agreement. The payment above-described shall be paid through certified check or cashier’s check in favour of the law firm Reyna & Asociados, which shall act as the Depository Agent custodian of the funds.
C-0078: Promise of Purchase and Sale Agreement dated April 2013
[Page 43]
“I just want to clarify that the real estate operations carried out with PUNELA INVESTMENT (OMEGA) and with ALPHA BUSINESS CORP are perfectly legal and legitimate acquisitions. I don’t believe that there are any links of any other kind of relationship between OMEGA and the people related to Mr. Ricardo Calvo and other people . . . .”
“He suggested including the Concepto y Espacios payment within the legitimate operations of my client JR BOCAS INVESTMENT.”
Supplemental Declaration of Maria Gabriela Reyna Lopez dated 14 July 2015 (C-0089 resubmitted), at 5, 8.
- See also Jimenez 2 at 38
[Page 44]
- Troyano ¶ 14
[Page 45]
[Page 46]
Panama’s Designated Prosecutor:
Omega Panama and PR Solutions were “in the range of companies not linked to the unjustified assets of [Moncada Luna] according to the theory of the case of the prosecution.”
Transcript of Moncada Luna’s Sentencing Hearing dated 5 Mar. 2015 (C-0930) at 26:36
[Page 47]
|
[C-0083 resubmitted] Coat of Arms: Republic of Panama] REPORT OF THE EVALUATING COMMISSION Your Excellence
8. Verifying Commission To evaluate the technical and financial proposals of the proposing companies, a Verifying Commission was appointed, which was made of the following clerks of the Judiciary Body:
C-0083: Report from the Vetting Commission dated 9 Oct. 2012 at 1 |
E. RESULTADOS DE EVALUACION/CUADRO No.2 CONSTRUCCIÓN DE UN EDIFICIO PARA LA UNIDAD JUDICIAL REGIONAL DEL DISTRITO DE LA CHORRERA
C-0083 at 7 |
[Page 48]
|
“The methodology used to prepare this Report has been that of a ‘blind’ analysis by each of the experts, which entails individually assessing the contractual documentation (Annex 2 of the Report identifies the documents of the bid file analyzed in the Expert Report) without any knowledge of the scores awarded by the Evaluation Committee. . . . The two evaluations agree on the winning company of the Bid: CONSORCIO OMEGA ENGINEERING, as well as in its score, which is 100 POINTS.” Public Contracts Experts at 3, 6 |
“On October 17, 2012, Justice Moncada Luna, taking into consideration the report from the evaluation commission designated to evaluate the companies that participated in the Public Act, selected Omega as the Contractor for the La Chorrera Project and, at Justice Moncada Luna’s direction, and in accordance with the Law of Public Contracts, the Judicial Authority executed the La Chorrera Contract with Omega on November 22, 2012.” Vielsa Rios 1 ¶ 12 |
[Page 49]
I conclude that Panama failed to prove that Omega and/or Mr. Rivera engaged in corrupt acts for the following reasons:
- Panama did not provide any evidence that the La Chorrera contract was corruptly awarded to Omega.
- Panama did not provide any evidence that other individuals who would have been co-conspirators in a corrupt awarding of the La Chorrera contract were investigated or charged including the bid’s vetting commission, Vielsa Rios, and the Comptroller General.
- Panama did not provide any evidence of communications, meetings, phone calls, meeting with intermediaries, witness testimony, alleged co-conspirator testimony or other documents evidencing either the bid scheme or quid pro quo.
- Panama relied on flawed financial analysis in the Aguirre and Villalba Reports as well as in Resolutions prepared by both the Organized Crime Prosecutor and Corruption Prosecutor. The flawed financial analysis was the key evidence provided and this evidence is inconclusive, meaning that the allegation that Omega and/or Mr. Rivera was the payor of a bribe to Mr. Moncada Luna is nothing more than a guess.
- Panama provided testimony transcripts and witness statements/declarations from a variety of people including Judicial Authority employees, employees of Omega and competitors of Omega, none of which implicate Omega or Mr. Rivera in any corrupt act.
- Jimenez 2 at pp. 5-6
[Page 50]
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
“Based on the above considerations, we respectfully recommend to the Honorable Court that a ruling be issued ordering OBJECTIVE AND IMPERSONAL PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL, pursuant to the provisions of Article 2208, number 1 of the Judicial Code, which will not result in res judicata and with the understanding that a request may be submitted to reopen the case if new evidence comes to light.
C-0942 at p. 9
[Page 51]
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
RULING
Based on the merits of the foregoing, the SECOND SUPERIOR COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, administering justice on behalf of the Republic and as authorized by law . . . DETERMINES: DECLARE the nullity of every act in the criminal proceedings officially initiated and based on accusations from members from the community, for the allegations of money laundering, against .... OSCAR IVÁN RIVERA, ID No. 421723037; as a result of violation of due process and errors related to general denomination of the crime.
C-0008 resubmitted 2 at p. 2
[Page 52]
|
[illegible] |
The Republic of Panama’s Memorandum in Support of Its Objections to Claimants’ Document Requests ¶ 44 |
[Page 53]
|
[illegible] |
Expert Report of Mr. Roy Pollitt dated 15 Nov. 2019 at 1 |
[Page 54]
The Department of State refers to Diplomatic Note No. NV-15-079, dated December 21, 2015, from the Embassy of Panama, which requested the provisional arrest for the purpose of extradition of Oscar Ivan Rivera Rivera to stand trial in Panama for the crime of money laundering, in violation of Chapter IV, Title VII, of the Crimes against the Economic Order, Book Two of the Penal Code of Panama.
The United States cannot proceed with the provisional arrest request at this time, as it does not contain sufficient factual support linking Rivera Rivera to the money laundering charge. In order to proceed with the request, the United States would need to know the evidence on which the Government of Panama relied to conclude that Rivera Rivera was engaged in a money laundering operation related to the unlawful enrichment conviction against Alejandro Moncada Luna Carvajal. Such evidence could include, for example, an explanation of bank records which show the movement of money by Rivera Rivera and reflect that he knew the money was obtained through illegal means, a summary of testimony given by a co-conspirator, or any other evidence which clearly indicates that Rivera Rivera knowingly participated in the money laundering operation described in the provisional arrest request. Such evidence could include, for example, an
DIPLOMATIC NOTE
C-0900: Letter from Panama’s Foreign Affairs Ministry to Panama’s Office of the Attorney General attaching the U.S. State Department’s Denial of Panama’s Request of a Provisional Arrest for the Purpose of Extraditing Mr. Rivera dated 29 Feb. 2016
[Page 55]
[C-0900]
Produced Pursuant to Procedural Order No. 2
[illegible]29 February 2016
A.J.-MRE-2016-18374REPUBLIC OF PANAMA
Ministry of Foreign RelationsPANAMA 4, PANAMA
Dear Prosecutor:
I am pleased to contact you with reference to note PGN-FSA-3407-15 dated 17 December 2015 by means of which you sent Official Notice No. 11414-15 dated 10 December 2015 by the Special Prosecutor against Organized Crime, requesting the Judicial Authorities of the United States of America to proceed with the Provisional arrest for the Purpose of Extradition of the [Redacted] Puerto Rican citizen OSCAR IVAN RIVERA RIVERA, passport no. [Redacted], born on [Redacted], by virtue of a precautionary measure of arrest issued by such investigative authority based on Resolution No. 15 dated 25 August 2015.
Regarding this matter, by way of note NG-16-031 dated 12 February 2016, the Embassy of Panama in Washington sent a Diplomatic Note dated 10 February 2016, based on which the State Department advised that, as of this date, the provisional arrest of Mr. OSCAR IVAN RIVERA RIVERA can not proceed considering that the documentation which was provided lacks sufficient facts connecting the aforementioned person with the charges of money laundering and which provided some suggestions to once again reiterate such request, which we are sending to you in the attached note.
While sending you the referenced note, I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate my consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Signature
NADIA MONTENEGRO DE DETRESNO
Deputy General Director of
Legal Affairs and TreatiesTo the Honorable Msc.
DIGNA M. ATENCIO BONILLA
Senior Prosecutor for International Affairs at
the Office of the Attorney General of the NationAttachment: as specified
NM/Diov
PUBLIC MINISTRY
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE NATION
Archive and CorrespondenceControl No.: 1216
Received on this present day of 01 March 2016
Time: 11:04 AM Via messenger
Signature
Received
C-0900: Letter from Panama’s Foreign Affairs Ministry to Panama’s Office of the Attorney General attaching the U.S. State Department’s Denial of Panama’s Request of a Provisional Arrest for the Purpose of Extraditing Mr. Rivera dated 29 Feb. 2016
[Page 56]
“It is also my opinion that Panama failed to show—and certainly could not have proved—that Omega and/or Mr. Rivera engaged in money laundering with respect to corruption allegations involving Moncada Luna. Panama relied exclusively on bank transaction analysis to link Mr. Rivera and Omega to Mr. Moncada Luna. However, Panama’s bank transaction analyses included mathematical errors, illogical assumptions, contradictory interpretations of the same set of transactions and missing days/weeks/months of transactions during which Panama has no idea what happened and cannot ascribe the transactions to anyone, let alone Omega or Mr. Rivera.
The flawed transaction analyses invalidates Panama’s corruption and money laundering allegations against Omega and Mr. Rivera and severs any claimed “link” between Omega and/or Mr. Rivera and Mr. Moncada Luna. Moreover, Panama was unable to produce any other evidence of supposed corruption or money laundering such as communications, witness testimony or computer records to support their conclusion. Finally, Panama failed to either investigate or failed to produce evidence of investigations into certain other individuals who may have been linked to the unjust enrichment of Mr. Moncada Luna.”
Jimenez 2 at p. 3
[Page 57]
Charles T. Kotuby Jr.
Other Jurisdictional Objections and Treaty Standards
Restitution and Quantum
[Page 58]
[Page 59]
Article 1.3: Relation to Other Agreements
The BIT Remains in Force
Article 2.1: Definitions of General Application
covered investment means, with respect to a Party, an investment, as defined in Article 10.29 (Definitions), in its territory of an investor of the other Party in existence as of the date of entry into force of this Agreement or established, acquired, or expanded thereafter;
The TPA Covers This Entire Investment
[Page 60]
|
Corruption Allegations |
|
|
Criminal |
Commercial Acts Only |
|
Dispute Resolution Clauses |
[Page 61]
|
Panama Bilateral Investment Treaty 1982: Entered into Force May 30, 1991 |
Chapter Ten Investment Section A: Investment Article 10.1: Scope and Coverage
|
|
Criminal |
Commercial Acts Only |
|
Dispute Resolution Clauses |
[Page 62]
|
Panama Bilateral Investment Treaty 1982: Entered into Force May 30, 1991 |
Chapter Ten Investment Section A: Investment Article 10.1: Scope and Coverage
[illegible] Relation to Other Chapters [illegible] of any inconsistency between this Chapter and another Chapter, the other [illegible] the extent of the inconsistency. [illegible] that a service supplier of the other Party post a bond or other [illegible] [illegible]ion of the cross-border supply of a service does not of itself [illegible] adopted or maintained by the Party relating to such [illegible]ter applies to measures adopted or maintained by [illegible] security, to the extent that such bond or [illegible] [illegible]intained by a Party to the extent [illegible] [illegible]orable than [illegible]ent. |
|
Criminal |
|
|
Dispute Resolution Clauses |
[Page 63]
2. In the event of an investment dispute between a Party and a national or company of the other Party with respect to an investment of such national or company in the territory of the first Party, the parties to the dispute shall initially seek to resolve it by consultation and negotiation. The parties may, upon the initiative of either of them and as a part of their consultation and negotiation, agree to rely upon non-binding, third-party procedures, such as the fact-finding facility available under the Rules of the Additional Facility ("Additional Facility") of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes ("Centre"). If the dispute cannot be resolved through consultation and negotiation, then the dispute shall be submitted for settlement in accordance with the applicable dispute- settlement procedures upon which they have previously agreed. Such procedures may provide for recourse to international arbitration using a forum such as the Inter-American Commercial Arbitration Commission. With respect to expropriation by either Party, any dispute-settlement procedures specified in an investment agreement between such Party and such national or company shall remain binding and shall be enforceable in accordance with, inter alia, the terms of the investment agreement, relevant provisions of the domestic laws of such Party and treaties and other international agreements regarding enforcement of arbitral awards to which such Party has adhered.
CL-0001: U.S.–Panama BIT
[Page 64]
ARTICLE VII
1. For purposes of this Article, an investment dispute is defined as a dispute involving: (a) the interpretation or application of an investment agreement between a Party and a national or company of the other Party; (b) the interpretation or application of any investment authorization granted by its foreign investment authority to such national or company; or (c) an alleged breach of any right conferred or created by this Treaty with respect to an investment.
CL-0001: U.S.–Panama BIT
[Page 65]
|
2. In the event of an investment dispute between a Party and a national or company of the other Party with respect to an investment of such national or company in the territory of the first Party, the parties to the dispute shall initially seek to resolve it by consultation and negotiation. The parties may, upon the initiative of either of them and as a part of their consultation and negotiation, agree to rely upon non-binding, third-party procedures, such as the fact-finding facility available under the Rules of the Additional Facility ("Additional Facility") of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes ("Centre"). If the dispute cannot be resolved through consultation and negotiation, then the dispute shall be submitted for settlement in accordance with the applicable dispute- settlement procedures upon which they have previously agreed. Such procedures may provide for recourse to international arbitration using a forum such as the Inter-American Commercial Arbitration Commission. With respect to expropriation by either Party, any dispute-settlement procedures specified in an investment agreement between such Party and such national or company shall remain binding and shall be enforceable in accordance with, inter alia, the terms of the investment agreement, relevant provisions of the domestic laws of such Party and treaties and other international agreements regarding enforcement of arbitral awards to which such Party has adhered. 3. (a) The national or company concerned may choose to consent in writing to the submission of the dispute to the Additional Facility for settlement, either by conciliation or binding arbitration, at any time after six months from the date upon which the dispute arose. Once the national or company concerned has so consented, either party to the dispute may institute proceedings before the Additional Facility, provided the dispute has not, for any reason, been submitted for resolution in accordance with any applicable dispute settlement procedures previously agreed to by the parties to the dispute, and the national or company concerned has not brought the dispute before the courts of justice, administrative tribunals or agencies of competent jurisdiction of either Party. (b) Each Party hereby consents to the submission of an investment dispute to the Additional Facility for settlement by conciliation or binding arbitration. (c) Conciliation or binding arbitration of such dispute shall be done in accordance with the provisions of the Regulations and Rules of the Additional Facility. (d) Each Party shall provide for the enforcement within its territory of Additional Facility arbitral awards. |
Provision only applies where a “Party and a national” have “previously agreed” to a forum for “investment disputes” ...such as, in “investment agreement[s],” which is a separate category of investment disputes in Article VII(1) |
CL-0001: U.S.–Panama BIT
[Page 66]
“Any dispute related to the execution, enforcement, development or termination of the Contract that cannot be resolved directly by the parties shall be resolved by legal arbitration, in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce.” C-0028: Contract No. 077 dated 22 Sept. 2011; C-0030: Contract No. 083 dated 22 Sept. 2011; C-0031: Contract No. 085 dated 22 Sept. 2011.
“THE PARTIES have chosen Panama City, Panama as special domicile . . . Any claim that arises due to the interpretation or enforcement of this Contract shall be resolved by mutual agreement between The Parties, and if it cannot be resolved in this way, the dispute shall be submitted to the Panamanian courts.” C-0042: Contract No. 093-12 dated 6 July 2012; C-0034: Contract No. 043 dated 17 Aug. 2012.
[Page 67]
|
Panama Bilateral Investment Treaty 1982: Entered into Force May 30, 1991 [illegible] Criminal Investigations Off-Limits |
Chapter Ten Investment Section A: Investment Article 10.1: Scope and Coverage
Article 10.2: Relation to Other Chapters
Article 10.3: National Treatment
10-1 |
[Page 68]
|
Panama Bilateral Investment Treaty Signed October 27, 1982; Entered into Force May 30, 1991 Investment Treaty with Panama 99th Congress 2nd Session SENATE Treaty Doc. 99-14 MESSAGE MARCH 25, 1986-Treaty was read the first time and, together with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL The White House, March 25,1986. To the Senate of the United States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Panama concerning the Treatment and Protection of Investments, with Agreed Minutes, signed October 27, 1982, at Washington. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State with CL-0001: U.S.–Panama BIT |
Chapter Ten Investment Section A: Investment Article 10.1: Scope and Coverage
Article 10.2: Relation to Other Chapters
Article 10.3: National Treatment
10-1 CL-0003: U.S.–Panama TPA |
[Page 69]
|
Expropriation: #1 through #8: The “substantial deprivation” of “virtually all” of an investment Fair and Equitable Treatment: #1 through #10: Arbitrariness, a willful neglect of duty and due process, and subjective bad faith Full Protection & Security: #8 through #10: Threats to physical security Umbrella Clause: #1 through #6: Sovereign failure to “observe obligations . . . with regard to investment” |
[Page 70]
VALUATION DATE: DEC. 23, 2014
[Page 71]
|
Claimants’ [Redacted] |
Goodwill |
Value of |
[Page 72]
* Does not include interest
|
Claimants’ [Redacted] |
Goodwill |
Value of US$ 8.69 |
[Page 73]
* Does not include interest
|
Claimants’ [Redacted] |
Goodwill US$ 42.53 |
Value of US$ 8.69 |
[Page 74]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
* Does not include interest
|
Claimants’ [Redacted] |
Goodwill US$ 42.53 |
Value of US$ 8.69 |
[Page 75]
CONTAINS PROTECTED INFORMATION
* Does not include interest
|
Claimants’ [Redacted] |
Goodwill US$ 42.53 |
Value of US$ 8.69 |
|
[Redacted] ▲ Pre-award interest has not been applied to moral damages |
||
[Page 76]
Carlos F. Concepción
Shook, Hardy & Bacon
Conclusion
[Page 77]
One Firm Worldwide®