Justice R.K.

Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

1ST NLIU JUSTICE R.K.TANKHA INTERNATIONAL MOOT

ABPL V. GOVERNMENT OF BARBARIA

MOOT PROPOSITION

1.

Ambrister & Bathind Pvt. Ltd. (ABPL) is a company incorporated under the laws of the Great
Dominion of Novelia, having its registered office at the capital- Dondon. It specializes in the supply,
distribution and transmission of Energy products, renewable and non-renewable, within the USA and
also in few European & Asian countries. BAPL, a fully owned subsidiary of ABPL operating from
Sayman Islands.

2.

Optical Commitments Pvt. Ltd. (OCPL) is a company registered under the Barbarian Companies Act,
having its registered office at Sombay. It is a trading company which also provides Services within the
Republic of Barbaria.

3.

ABPL got a patent regarding a new use of Muon tomography by virtue of which it made hand held
guns which use cosmic ray muons to generate three-dimensional images of particle-matter volumes
using information contained in the Coulomb scattering of the muons. This found novel uses in the
industry like the exact quantity and quality of coal lying in trenches in old coal mines could be
predicted. The predictions were 100 % accurate, and proved a boon to safeguard the mine workers
from the hazards of toxic gases hidden in trenches and of caving mines.

4.

Mr.Ambrister happened to meet Mr. Shaw, one of the Directors of OCPL, in the Global Energy
Summit at Dondon in March 2012. After elaborate discussions, Mr.Ambrister saw a business
opportunity in the Coal sector of Barbaria, which he found to be an emerging market with great
potential. This was also due to the regime of General Aldi Elmin who had a penchant for human rights,
and had enforced strict labour welfare measures, whereunder coal mines which had even one recorded
incident of casualty to any mine worker, were closed forever.

5.

Mr.Shaw, gauging the inclination, floated the idea of entering in a business partnership for providing
High Calorific Value coal from the best mines of Barbaria, based on the Muon Tomography technique.

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 1

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

Mr. HariBrook whose place of birth was Barbaria, and who was a senior employee of BAPL was
designated to finalise the contractual nuances. Incidentally, the patent of the hand held gun was also in
name of Mr. HariBrook and was licensed to its corporate users with inherent field-of-use limitation
clauses, sequentially through ABPL and BAPL. Several emails were exchanged between Mr.
Haribrook and Mr. Shaw. The contractual design was such that ABPL will purchase coal from OCPL
which will be transported through BAPL, and for this purpose BAPL will enter into a separate contract
of affreightment with OCPL. It is a matter of record that BAPL had acted as a carrier even for
competitors of ABPL.
6.

It is also a matter of record that the parties had several differences over the ownership structure of the
SPV for running the business, financing, as well as the dispute resolution clause. However, Mr.
Haribrook and Mr. Shaw developed intimate relations and were able to reach some sort of
understanding over the charter party contract. To take away the adverse effect of the differences
regarding the Technology Transfer Contract concerning use of Muon Tomography and the main
contract regarding supply of coal; both of them decided that the contract of affreightment will not be
limited to the coal meant for ABPL but will also include Coal meant for distant ports like Australia,
Africa, and Asian destinations including China and Indonesia.

7.

During one of their interactions, Mr. Shaw and Mr. Haribrook realized that BAPL had a previous three
year multi-location contract of affreightment dated 4.2.2007 which was discharged

on 8.7.2009.

Therefore, they decided to base all their negotiations taking the contract dated 4.2.2007 as the base
contract.
8.

Mr. Bathind sought telephonic instructions from the other Directors of ABPL and on March 31, 2012
while at Dondon, called up Mr. Shaw to give up his insistence on the dispute resolution clause of the
main contract given the fact that Mr. Haribrook and Mr. Shaw had successfully finalized the
Technology Transfer Contract concerning Muon Tomography. However, Mr. Shaw insisted that the
final picture from the end of ABPL regarding the main contract must come in writing and that the
entire transaction was one whole package, meaningless in parts. Another point insisted by Mr. Shaw

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 2

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

was regarding introduction of a special clause in the contract to take the benefit of the Make in
Barbaria scheme, whereunder all technology import, and resultant export of goods, was exempt from
all taxes levied by the Government of Barbaria on payment of a one time tax (OTT) of 0.01 % ad
valorem on the total turnover. This scheme was generally applauded by the global business houses, and
brought in huge investments in technology and exports originating from Barbaria grew like never
before. To avoid any bureaucratic delays, a strict time line was brought in place for all government
approvals through a single window.There was a sovereign indemnity and guarantee entered into by the
Barbarian State in favour of any foreign investor to safeguard the investment as permissible under the
law subject to full compliance with all laws of Barbaria as a tripartite contract. For all purposes, the
UNCITRAL Model and the CISG were adopted as the governing laws for the contract and dispute
emanating therefrom.
9.

Vide email dated 1.4.2012, Mr. Ambrister wrote to Mr. Shaw with a clean fix copy of the main
contract and stated that:
a.

Contract is final from their end, subject only to their satisfaction regarding last three year
audited balance sheets of OCPL certified by an authorized auditor as per governing laws.

b.

Dispute resolution clause shall be the same, as contained in the previous contract of
affreightment.

c.

Owners

management Subs: Contract to come into operation after approval of Board of

Directors or Management of OCPL by ABPL.

d.

Sub agreeing all other port rates/ Increased / decreased load discharge Rates: matter of finer
detail, which can be mutually finalized by parties.

e.

All other terms shall be the same, mutatis-mutandis, subject to changed rates, fuel cost, and
other circumstances.

f.

Rates for the Indonesian ports was attached as Appendix to the draft contract.

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 3

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

10.

In the meanwhile, OCPL was able to implement the Muon Tomography so successfully in mines across
Barbaria that the Finance Minister of Barbaria made a public statement on September 21, 2012 that
their mines are not yielding coal, but giving gold. This success of OCPL was looked at with suspicion
by several activists, one of which was Mr. Sap Ansowal. Mr. Sap Ansowal demanded a public enquiry
into the output of mines of Barbaria run by OCPL based on the public-trust doctrine, and took out
processions where he received a lot of public support. Taking cue from his allegations, one Mr. Kur
Delwal filed Freedom of Information applications and was able to establish that OCPL has been
involved in corrupt practices. Such practices included under-reporting of coal output, to pay lesser
royalty to Government; bribing the officials of State to get extra transport permits, paying no exportduties etc. In one of the responses received dated Oct 1, 2012, it was noted that all such coal was being
sent to respective destinations via Cayman Islands, and the cargo and freight was being paid by one Mr.
Haribrook, who was not a Barbarian citizen while no OTT was paid @ 0.1 %.

11.

This resulted in an immediate press meet being called jointly by ABPL and BAPL on Oct 2, 2012,
where Mr. Ambrister stated that he is authorized to convey that their companies or their employee Mr.
HariBrook - have not done anything illegal, and have also not indulged in bribing or violation of any
laws; and truth alone will eventually triumph.

12.

However, on Oct 3, 2012 the enforcement agencies of Barbaria raided the premises of OCPL and
recovered a huge amount of cash in various foreign currencies. Admissions of several OCPL
employees were recorded regarding money laundering and bribing of public officials. One of the
documents recovered was an email dated Aug 21, 2012 containing a credit note of US $ 50 million,
with

meticulous

details

of

amounts

paid

to

government

offices

which

was

sent

by

<haribhook@bappll.org> Forensic investigation revealed that the said email address was fake and the
email originated from server of BAPL. Despite strenuous effort, the location of the server could not be
known.

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 4

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

13.

The media immediately published news items connecting BAPL with the raid and a series of such
publications forced the Chief of Enforcement of Barbaria to reveal on Oct 5, 2012 that they had
received tip-off regarding illegal activities of OCPL from none other than BAPL. The matter was
widely reported in the international press for an entire week and led to the Ease of Business ranking
of Barbaria being reduced by 9 points by Nov 2012.

14.

On Dec 1, 2012 the Government of Barbaria froze all assets of ABPL and BAPL in the State of
Barbaria which were in excess of US $ 100 billion, and declared all their personnel as persona-nongrata and cancelled their work permits with immediate effect. It also issued a notice of International
Arbitration on Dec 2, 2012 to ABPL claiming sovereign defamation due to the activities of ABPL, its
affiliates and corporate subordinates in the territory of Barbaria leading to violation of laws and
lowering the image and esteem of the Sovereign State of Barbaria before the international community.
It adduced proof to ABPL in the form of certain audio and video clips sent by certain honest officials
establishing efforts by OCPL to bribe them to reopen closed mines swiftly. One of the audio clips had a
specific statement by an OCPL employee regarding money received from BAPL being offered to an
official.

15.

While denying the arbitrability of the dispute sought to be raised by the Government of Barbaria,
ABPL issued a counter notice to the Government of Barbaria seeking International Arbitration
regarding the freezing of assets as amounting to expropriation, and the cancellation of work permits as
hostile and illegal behavior. It was also specifically stated that the dispute regarding defamation
involves public law aspects, which cannot be settled before a private law forum like Arbitration.

16.

Separately, ABPL and BAPL also issued a joint notice seeking Arbitration with OCPL claiming
damages for use of technology without authorization, accounts and profits earned thereby. In addition,
damages were also sought regarding the conduct of OCPL in bribing public officials and thereby
causing loss of image and esteem to ABPL. ABPL demanded OCPL to appoint the sole arbitrator as
per the procedure designated.

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 5

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

17.

After the notice was dispatched for OCPL, but before it could reach OCPL; an anti suit injunction was
obtained by OCPL against ABPL claiming that there was no finalized contract between ABPL and
OCPL. This was challenged by ABPL before the superior courts, however it has remained pending for
over two years.

18.

In the meantime, ABPL invoked the conciliatory mechanism under the Joint Nations (JN) Treaty of
Conciliation, and ABPL and the Government of Barbaria attempted to solve their disputes by way of
mediation. Initially it seemed that a resolution will be reached, however by June 2015 it was clear that
there is no conciliation possible.

19.

Realizing that the judicial system of Barbaria is highly understaffed and lacks infrastructure, ABPL
pleaded before the Arbitral Tribunal to amend its claim and have two additional points inserted, as
follows:
a.

That the State of Barbaria has failed to maintain an effective dispute resolution mechanism
domestically, by not granting proper funding to the judicial wing of the government, and not
catering to its infrastructural needs; and therefore it has led to a great delay of two years in
efforts of ABPL to recover its just-dues by way of judicial due process; and its judge to
population ratio is 13 judges per million people, which is worse than several underdeveloped
nations of the world;

b.

That consequently upon the finding of failure of domestic judicial mechanisms, as urged; the
State of Barbaria is liable to pay damages payable by OCPL by way of sovereign indemnity;

20.

The State of Barbaria did not protest the amendment being allowed, keeping it subject only to their
right to claim that the relief demanded in the amendment claim is non-arbitrable.

21.

The matter is now listed for arguments including argument based on kompetenz kompetenz before the
ld. Arbitral Tribunal.
___________

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 6

Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial Moot Court Competition

2016 Edition
National Law Institute University, Bhopal

Nota Bene:
a.

All references, actual, deeming or fictional; are fictional.

b.

Participants stand advised to devise a litigation strategy. Issues can be argued in alternative/without
prejudice, be divided into sub-issues, and can be added to or amended upon. It is permissible to concede
issue(s) at the time of oral arguments subject, however, to appropriate explanation readily available on the
query of the bench. However, the written submissions must address all the issues. After the submission of
the memorials is complete, a list of issues that can be argued by either side will be published on the
competition web-page.

c.

Any citations, without actual para/page references, will invite negative marking. Unnecessary citations and
passim references are to be avoided. In case of oral arguments, primary references for all case-laws being
referred is mandatory and no participant will be allowed to cite a case-law from a secondary source like
text-books or commentaries. Primary reference may be made to select treatises which are treated as
authorities in their own right.

d.

The moot problem is the way it is, with full application of the principle of as is, there iswhatever where
is. No queries or requests for clarifications will be entertained.

e.

Please avoid use of any plastic materials or binding for the Memorials. Use simple color-paper sheets for
identification of respective sides. Use of any plastic, or binding material will invite negative marking.

Moral Rights Reserved

Rishabh Sancheti

MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

PAGE 7