DOCSLIB.ORG

Claimant's Reply Memorial

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Claimant's Reply Memorial INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES ITALBA CORPORATION, Claimant, v. THE ORIENTAL REPUBLIC OF URUGUAY, Respondent. ICSID Case No. ARB/16/9 CLAIMANT’S REPLY MEMORIAL May 12, 2017 HUGHES HUBBARD & REED LLP One Battery Park Plaza New York, NY 10004 United States of America FERRERE ABOGADOS Juncal 1392 Montevideo, C.P. 11000 Uruguay TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 II. FACTS ............................................................................................................................. 11 A. Uncontested Facts ............................................................................................................ 11 B. Facts In Dispute ............................................................................................................... 28 C. Reply Facts ...................................................................................................................... 29 III. JURISDICTION .............................................................................................................. 55 A. Italba Is A Covered Investor Under The Treaty. ............................................................. 57 B. Uruguay Cannot Deny Italba The Protections Of The Treaty. ........................................ 78 C. Italba’s claims are timely. ................................................................................................ 88 IV. LIABILITY .................................................................................................................... 102 A. Uruguay Unlawfully Expropriated Italba’s Investment. ............................................... 102 B. Uruguay Has Denied Italba Justice By Frustrating The Judgment Of Its Own Highest Administrative Court. .................................................................................................... 124 C. Uruguay Breached Its Article 5 Obligation To Accord Italba Fair And Equitable Treatment. ...................................................................................................................... 134 D. Uruguay Failed To Afford Italba’s Investment Full Protection And Security. ............. 153 V. QUANTUM ................................................................................................................... 157 A. Compensation For Uruguay’s Treaty Breaches Must Be Determined Under The “Full Reparation” Standard Of Customary International Law. .............................................. 160 B. Full Reparation Should Be Calculated As Of March 1, 2015. ...................................... 162 C. Under The Full Reparation Standard, Italba Is Entitled To Compensation Equal To The Value Of Trigosul’s Rights To Use The Spectrum In A “But-For” Scenario In Which Uruguay’s Breaches Did Not Occur. ............................................................................. 164 D. In The “But-For” Valuation Scenario, URSEC Would Have Acted As A Reasonable, Good-Faith Regulator. ................................................................................................... 173 E. Under The Full Reparation Standard, Italba Is Entitled To Compensation Equal To The Historical Profits It Would In All Probability Have Received But For Uruguay’s Treaty Breaches. ........................................................................................................................ 176 F. Under The Full Reparation Standard, The Quantum Of Compensation Awarded Must Be Brought To A Present Value By An Award Of Interest. ............................................... 178 VI. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................ 183 i I. INTRODUCTION 1. Italba Corporation (Italba), a company incorporated under the laws of the State of Florida in the United States of America (the U.S.), submits this Reply Memorial (Reply) in further support of its right to full reparation from the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (Uruguay) based upon Uruguay’s breach of the Treaty Concerning The Encouragement And Reciprocal Protection of Investment Between Uruguay and the United States (the Treaty).1 In its Memorial, Italba demonstrated that Uruguay unlawfully expropriated Italba’s investment through its non- compliance with and frustration of a final judgment (the TCA Judgment) of its own highest administrative court (the Tribunal de lo Contencioso Administrativo (TCA)) that reinstated the wrongly revoked telecommunications licenses of Italba’s Uruguayan subsidiary, Trigosul S.A. (Trigosul).2 2. Italba also demonstrated that Uruguay, through the conduct of its telecommunications regulator, the Unidad Reguladora de Servicios de Comunicaciones (URSEC),3 breached the Treaty’s guarantees of fair and equitable treatment, non-discrimination, and full protection and security because: (a) over the course of seven years, URSEC repeatedly failed to issue Trigosul a license conforming to regulations promulgated in March 2003, as 1. Treaty Between the United States of America and The Oriental Republic of Uruguay Concerning the Encouragement And Reciprocal Protection of Investment (signed on Nov. 4, 2005; entered into force on Nov. 1, 2006) (Treaty) (C-001). Italba’s Reply is submitted pursuant to the Tribunal’s Procedural Order No. 1, as amended by the Tribunal’s letter of April 28, 2017, and pursuant to Rule 31 of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Rules of Procedure for Arbitration Proceedings (ICSID Arbitration Rules), and responds to the Counter-Memorial of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (Jan. 30, 2017) (Counter- Memorial). It is accompanied by documentary exhibits C-001 through C-275 and legal authorities CL-001 through CL-155, the statements by seven fact witnesses (including supplemental witness statements from Dr. Gustavo Alberelli and Mr. Luis Herbon), and four new expert reports, respectively addressing: (a) the handwriting on the Data Transmission and Equipment Loan Agreement (Dec. 2010) (C-057); (b) the authenticity of certain emails produced by Italba; (c) technical telecommunications issues; and (d) relevant points of Uruguayan corporate law, as well as a supplemental report on quantum by Compass Lexecon (Second Dellepiane Report). In accordance with Procedural Order No. 1 (¶ 18.5.2), dated July 29, 2016, all of Italba’s Exhibits and Legal Authorities are numbered using the format provided therein (e.g., C-001 and CL- 001, respectively). 2. Claimant’s Memorial (Sept. 16, 2016) (Memorial) ¶¶ 177-80. 3. Id. ¶¶ 114-15, 122-50, 167-75. mandated by Uruguayan law, despite having provided Italba repeated assurances that a license would soon be forthcoming,4 and even while the agency responded to similar requests from many of Trigosul’s and Italba’s domestic and foreign competitors;5 and (b) in January 2011, URSEC summarily revoked Trigosul’s license to operate on its allocated frequencies, claiming that Trigosul’s offices in Montevideo had been abandoned, even though Trigosul had properly notified URSEC of a change of address months earlier.6 Finally, Italba has established that its damages, based upon the value of the investment expropriated in 2015 and business opportunities crushed by Uruguay’s prior unlawful conduct, amount to USD $61.1 million (including pre-award interest based on the cost of capital), as calculated in the supplemental valuation report submitted with this Reply.7 3. In response, Uruguay has accused Italba of attempting to perpetrate a fraud on this Tribunal and swindle the State out of tens of millions of dollars through a criminal enterprise based on forgeries and lies. 4. First, Uruguay argues that Italba has misrepresented itself as the owner of Trigosul because, at Trigosul’s inception, Dr. Gustavo Alberelli (the President and Chief Executive Officer of Italba) and his mother were listed as the company’s co-owners.8 In the event that Italba does own Trigosul, Uruguay claims to be entitled to deny Italba protection under the Treaty on the theory that Dr. Alberelli, an Italian citizen, controls Italba, and Italba is a 9 shell company with no business of its own. 4. Id. ¶¶ 30-34, 52. 5. Id. ¶¶ 155-66. 6. Id. ¶¶ 53-54, 63-67. 7. Id. ¶¶ 176, 212; Second Dellepiane Report Table 1. 8. See Counter-Memorial ¶ 56. 9. Id. ¶¶ 62, 69-83. 2 5. Second, Uruguay argues that Italba’s claims are time-barred because URSEC terminated Trigosul’s license in 2011, more than four years before a notice of dispute was sent in this case, and because URSEC’s subsequent refusal to implement the TCA Judgment anulling its termination of the license was merely a continuation of Uruguay’s prior conduct.10 6. Third, Uruguay denies Italba’s allegations on the merits, arguing: (a) Uruguay did not expropriate the license because it fully complied with the TCA Judgment; (b) even if it did not comply with the TCA Judgment, there can be no expropriation because the license was precarious in nature and terminable at will without compensation, and therefore worthless; (c) Trigosul deserved to be terminated in the first place because it failed to exploit the license; and (d) Trigosul’s complaints about URSEC’s failure to issue a conforming license are unfounded because no such conforming license was necessary under Uruguayan law.11 7. Finally, on damages, Uruguay repeats its argument that Trigosul’s license was worthless and also argues that Italba’s claim for lost business opportunities prior to the termination of Trigosul’s license
Load more

Recommended publications
  • World Bank Document
    Docwu.uzof TheWorld Bank FOR OmaAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Rqeot No. P-5831-lUR NMORAIIDUNANID RECOIMENDATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE TNTERNATIONALBAINK FOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPIMET TO THE Public Disclosure Authorized 5ECUTIVE DIRECTORS ON A PROPOSED PUBLIC ENTERPRISEREFORK LOAN (PERL) IN AN AMUNT EQUIVALENTTO US$11 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF URUGUAY Public Disclosure Authorized AUGUST 11, 1992 Ml CRF 1 CHE COPY Repport No. P 5631-UR Type: (PR) Title: PUPL1C ENTEXPRISTE REFORM LOAN Author: DAMMWiRT, ALFREDO Ext. :30142 Roorn:I6140 Dept.;:LA4TF Public Disclosure Authorized Country Department IV Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Office This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their offcial dties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed withoutWorld Bank authorizadon. RuaNCYUNIT The currency of Uruguay is the new Uruguayan peso which is managed by the Central Bank within a crawling peg system. As of July 30, 1992, the exchange rate stood at 3,110 new pesos to the U.S. dollar. FISCAL YEAR January 1 to Decembei 31 GLOSSARYOF ABBREVIATIONS AFE - State Railway Company ANCAP - State Petroleum, Alcohol and Cement Entity ANP - National Port Entity ANSE - National Stevedoring Services Association ANTEL - State Telecommunications Entity BHU - State Housing Bank BOD - Board of Directors BROU - Bank of the Republic CONTEL - National TelecommunicationsCommission CTM - Salto Grande Technical Commission DDSR - Debt and Debt Service Reduction DNH - National Directorate
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Document
    D)ocumentof The World Bank FOROFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Report No: 18056 Public Disclosure Authorized IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT U:RUGUAY PUBLIC ENTERPRI:SEREFORM LOAN (PERL) (Loan 3517-0 UR) Public Disclosure Authorized June 30, 1998 PovertyReduction & Economic Management Latin America& the CaribbeanRegion Public Disclosure Authorized This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwisebe disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Currency Unit - New Uruguayan Peso (UR$) UR$I = US$0. 1002 US$1 = UR$9.98 (as of December 18, 1997) FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ANC National Postal Administration ANCAP - State Petroleum, Alcohol and Cement Entity ANP - National Port Administration ANSE - National Stevedoring Services Association ANTEL - State Telecommunications Entity GARE - Advisorv Group for State Reform GDP - Gross Domestic Product ,MERCOSUR - "Conimon Market of the South", a customs union of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, with Bolivia and Chile as associate members. MGAP - Ministry of Cattle. Agriculture and Fishing MTOP - Ministry of Transport and Public Works OPP - Office of Planning and Budgeting OSE - State Water and Sewerage Company PCU - Project Coordinating Unit (assumedby GARE) PERL - Public Enterprise Reform Loan PLUNA - State Commercial Aviation Company PPF - Project Preparation Facility UTE - State Power Entity UNDP - United Nations Development Program 8 ~~~~~~VicePresident: Shahid JavehdBurki Director, SMU:- Guillerrno Perrv Director, CiMU: Myrna Alexcander Task Manager: Luis-Jos_eMeiia FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY IMPLEMENTATIONCOMPLETION REPORT URUGUAY PUBLICENTERPRISE REFORM LOAN (PERL) (Loan3517-0 UR) TABLEOF CONTENTS Paue No. PREFACE EVALUATIONSUMMARY ......................................................... i-viii PARTI: PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT .
    [Show full text]
  • Uruguay Year 2020
    Uruguay Year 2020 1 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED Table of Contents Doing Business in Uruguay ____________________________________________ 4 Market Overview ______________________________________________________________ 4 Market Challenges ____________________________________________________________ 5 Market Opportunities __________________________________________________________ 5 Market Entry Strategy _________________________________________________________ 5 Leading Sectors for U.S. Exports and Investment __________________________ 7 IT – Computer Hardware and Telecommunication Equipment ________________________ 7 Renewable Energy ____________________________________________________________ 8 Agricultural Equipment _______________________________________________________ 10 Pharmaceutical and Life Science _______________________________________________ 12 Infrastructure Projects________________________________________________________ 14 Security Equipment __________________________________________________________ 15 Customs, Regulations and Standards ___________________________________ 17 Trade Barriers _______________________________________________________________ 17 Import Tariffs _______________________________________________________________ 17 Import Requirements and Documentation _______________________________________ 17 Labeling and Marking Requirements ____________________________________________ 17 U.S. Export Controls _________________________________________________________ 18 Temporary Entry ____________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • National Case Law on Freedom of Expression
    Original: Spanish National Case Law on Freedom of Expression Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights This book corresponds to chapter V of the 2016 Annual Report of the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression approved on March 15, 2017 by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Edison Lanza Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression INDEX INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................... 7 CASE LAW ON THE IMPORTANCE, FUNCTION, AND SCOPE OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................................................................................................11 CASE LAW ON ENTITLEMENT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS DUAL DIMENSION ...................................19 CASE LAW ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF LIMITATIONS TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: GENERAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................................................................................................................23 CASE LAW ON PROHIBITION OF PRIOR CENSORSHIP .....................................................................................................29 CASE LAW ON THE CONDITIONS THAT LIMITATIONS ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION MUST MEET IN ORDER TO BE ADMISSIBLE (THREE-PART
    [Show full text]
  • Encuentros Uruguayos Año IV, Número 4, Diciembre 2011 Revista: ENCUENTROS URUGUAYOS
    Revista Encuentros Uruguayos Año IV, Número 4, Diciembre 2011 Revista: ENCUENTROS URUGUAYOS Rafael Barradas "Atocha" 1919, Oleo sobre lienzo 53 x 66 cm fuente: http://www.rau.edu.uy/uruguay/cultura/barradas.htm Índice 1) Sección Ciencias Humanas ¿Cómo gestionar el cambio educativo? Estudio exploratorio sobre el impacto del Plan Ceibal y las nuevas políticas TIC desde la perspectiva de los educadores Eduardo Rodríguez y Fabián Téliz Presencia mbya-guaraní en Uruguay. Diálogos y experiencias, espacialidades e identidades en circulación Analía Pérez Landa 2) Sección historia reciente El problema de la enseñanza de la historia reciente. El caso del terrorismo de Estado. Iván Pablo Orbuch La reorganización del movimiento estudiantil y la restauración democrática en la UDELAR. 1980-1983 María Eugenia Jung “¿Una propuesta desobediente?” Apuntes sobre el Frente Grande y el movimiento popular en la ¿posdictadura o transición democrática? Héctor Altamirano El salto del conocimiento a la comprensión: la reapropiación del encierro y la represión en la obra literaria de Mauricio Rosencof Emilia Alfieri Tupamaros en Chile. Una experiencia bajo el gobierno de Salvador Allende Jimena Alonso Entre víctimas y combatientes. Continuidades y rupturas en la transmisión de las memorias sobre el pasado reciente entre generaciones de oficiales del Ejército Argentino Valentina Salvi 3) Sección imaginarios y crítica cultural En busca de la Nación Eduardo Piazza Resurgir Celeste: Mitos y Representaciones Colectivas en torno a la actuación uruguaya en Sudáfrica 2010 Cristian Maneiro La vuelta al mundo en ochenta… horas: genealogía de la “mundialidad” en la Exposición Universal de París de 1900 Alberto Bejarano Una nueva “politización” de la murga (1981-1984): La reapropiación de una palabra demasiado tiempo confiscada.
    [Show full text]
  • CASE GELMAN V. URUGUAY
    INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE GELMAN v. URUGUAY JUDGMENT OF FEBRUARY 24, 2011 (Merits and Reparations) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court,” “the Court,” or “the Tribunal”): Composed of the following judges: Diego García-Sayán, President; Leonardo A. Franco, Vice-President; Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Judge; Margarette May Macaulay, Judge; Rhadys Abreu Blondet, Judge; and Eduardo Vio Grossi, Judge also present: Pablo Saavedra Alessandri, Secretary, and Emilia Segares Rodríguez, Deputy Secretary, pursuant with Articles 62(3) and 63(1) of the American Convention of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”) and with Articles 31, 32, 34, 62, 64, 65 and 67 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court1 (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”), orders the present Judgment in the case of Juan Gelman, María Claudia García Iruretagoyena de Gelman and María Macarena Gelman García Iruretagoyena with the Eastern Republic of Uruguay (hereinafter "the State" or "Uruguay"), denominated “Gelman v. Uruguay.” Pursuant to Article 19(1) of the Inter-American Court Rules of Procedure in the present case (infra note 1), that establish that: “[i]n the cases referred to in Article 44 of the Convention, a Judge who is a national of the respondent State shall not be able to participate in the hearing and deliberation of the case.” Judge Alberto Pérez Pérez, of Uruguayan nationality, recused himself from participating in the processing and deliberation of this case and and signing of this Judgment. 1 The Court Rules of Procedure applied in the present case are those approved in the LXXXV Regular Period of Sessions held on November 16 and 18, 2009, and that came into force on January 1, 2010, pursuant to that approved in Article 78 therein.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed through, substandardm argins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections withsmall overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information C om pany 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with with permission permission of the of copyright the copyright owner.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Presidential Election, 2020
    United States presidential election, 2020 NOVEMBER 2020 Source: BBC Important Data • The popular vote does not determine the winner of the election in the United States, but the Electoral College votes do. In 2016, for example, Hillary Clinton got almost 3 million more votes than Donald Trump; however, the Electoral College vote distribution gave Donald Trump the victory. • Joe Biden won the popular vote and became the candidate with the most votes in the history of the US, surpassing Barack Obama who closed the 2008 election with 69,498,516 votes; the popular vote has also translated to enough Electoral College votes to make Joe Biden president-elect. About 150 million • Donald Trump obtained more votes in the 2020 election than he did in 2016, but the distribution did not help him get the 270 people voted Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency. during this electoral • Approximately 70% of the American electoral roll participated process in these elections. This participation had not been seen since the 1900 elections. Implications for Argentina with the election of Joe Biden • Economy: The Argentinian Government is currently undergoing an instance of negotiations with the International Monetary Fund. Because of this, the National Government is trying to show the world that the country is heading towards the economic solvency, in this sense, the Ministry of Economy has already launched several orthodox measures to promote the dollars entry to the country through a competitive scheme and is working on a bill by which the credits issued in foreign currencies, and the programs negotiated with the IMF, will have to count with the prior approval of the Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Environment Business Environment Investor Guide
    Business environment Business environment Investor Guide February 2020 Index » 1. Business environment 1.1 Performance and economic structure 1.2 Economic policy 1.3 Trade policy 1.4 State and private services 1.5 Clear rules 1.6 Incentives for foreign investment » 2. Supporting infrastructure 2.1 Transport system 2.2 Telecommunications 2.3 Energy 2.4 Drinking water and sanitation » 3. Financial system 3.1 Banking system 3.2 Central Bank 3.3 Stock market 3.4 Insurance 3.5 International financial centre » 4. Intellectual rights, trademarks and patents 1 BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT » Reliable country » Extended market » Ease of doing business » Talent » Quality of life 4 5 Uruguay leads the main rankings of political stability and democratic strength in Latin America. This reflects the country’s strong democratic tradition, based on transparent government policy and broad economic freedom. Thanks to the favorable investment environment and the country’s good macroeconomic performance in recent years, Uruguay has positioned itself as a reliable and attractive destination for foreign investors. Furthermore, its strategic location and international agreements with the most important economies in Latin America promote the country’s development as a regional hub. The Mercosur (Southern Common Market), its associated states and the FTA with Mexico, make it possible for Uruguay to gain access to a market of 400 million people, which accounts for 90% of the GDP1 and 89% of the foreign2 trade flow in Latin America. The country has talented and highly competitive human resources, thanks to a combination of several factors, including the high quality of basic, technical and university training, the flexibility and ease with which Uruguayan workers can adapt to new production processes and technologies, and salaries that are competitive in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • WT/TPR/S/374 • Uruguay
    WT/TPR/S/374 • Uruguay - 7 - SUMMARY 1. During the period under review, Uruguay implemented policies geared towards ensuring macroeconomic stability. Between 2011 and 2017, the country experienced economic growth in keeping with its potential growth, with an average annual increase in real GDP of about 3%. From 2011 to 2014, GDP growth was backed by strong domestic demand as well as a benign external environment, characterized by high international prices for agricultural raw materials. In 2015 and 2016 GDP growth was weak owing to the fall in domestic demand which, in its turn, was partly due to the erosion of the population's purchasing power as a result of the depreciation of the Uruguayan peso. Net exports compensated only partly for the decline in domestic demand. In 2017, GDP growth began to recover, largely thanks to the increase in exports of both goods (soya, meat, rice) and services (tourism). 2. Uruguay's per capita GDP is one of the highest in Latin America: in 2017 it had reached close to US$17,000, with a relatively equitable distribution of income. The poverty rate has fallen in recent years, from 18.5% in 2010 to 9.4% in 2016. However, though the economy grew during the review period, the unemployment rate increased, from 6.3% in 2011 to 8.1% during the third quarter of 2017. This was partly due to an increase in the activity rate, as well as to the fact that the most dynamic sectors of the economy over the past few years have been the least labour-intensive sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Issuer Identifier Numbers for the International Telecommunication Charge Card (In Accordance with Recommendation Itu-T E.118 (05/2006))
    Annex to ITU Operational Bulletin No. 1161 – 1.XII.2018 INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION TSB TELECOMMUNICATION STANDARDIZATION BUREAU OF ITU _____________________________________________________________________ LIST OF ISSUER IDENTIFIER NUMBERS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION CHARGE CARD (IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATION ITU-T E.118 (05/2006)) (POSITION ON 1 DECEMBER 2018) ______________________________________________________________________ Geneva, 2018 List of Issuer Identifier Numbers for the international Telecommunication charge card (In accordance with Recommendation ITU-T E.118) Note from TSB This List replaces the List annexed to Operational Bulletin No. 1088 of 15.XI.2015. It contains all the Issuer Identifier Numbers (IIN) registered by the ITU, which have been notified in the ITU Operational Bulletin up to and including No. 1161 of 1.XII.2018. For your information, this List will be updated by numbered series of amendments published in the ITU Operational Bulletin. This Annex is available for free download on ITU website. An IIN is used to identify a telecommunication company in a country, which is working in an international environment. According to ISO Standard 7812-2 , the criteria for approval and rejection of applications are: "4.3.1 Criteria for approval of an application for a single IIN Applications for a single IIN shall meet all the criteria for approval below and shall not comply with any of the criteria for rejection in 4.3.2 : a) the applicant applying for a single IIN shall not already have an IIN assigned to it in its own right (outside of any card scheme); b) the IIN shall be for immediate use, preferably within 12 months of the date of issue of the IIN; c) the card being issued shall be for use in an international interchange environment (see ISO/IEC 7812-1); d) the applicant shall be a single corporate entity operating under a specific legislative regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Inter-American Court, Crimes Against Humanity and Peacebuilding in South America
    ICIP WORKING PAPERS: 2010/02 Inter-American Court, Crimes Against Humanity and Peacebuilding in South America Joan Sánchez Inter-American Court, Crimes Against Humanity and Peacebuilding in South America Joan Sánchez Institut Català Internacional per la Pau Barcelona, May 2010 Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes, 658, baixos 08010 Barcelona (Spain) T. +34 93 554 42 70 | F. +34 93 554 42 80 [email protected] | http:// www.icip.cat Editors Javier Alcalde and Rafael Grasa Editorial Board Pablo Aguiar, Alfons Barceló, Catherine Charrett, Gema Collantes, Caterina Garcia, Abel Escribà, Vicenç Fisas, Tica Font, Antoni Pigrau, Xavier Pons, Alejandro Pozo, Mònica Sabata, Jaume Saura, Antoni Segura and Josep Mar- ia Terricabras Translation David Viinikka Graphic Design Atona, sl Printing gama, sl ISSN 2013-5793 (online edition) 2013-5785 (paper edition) DL B-38.039-2009 © 2009 Institut Català Internacional per la Pau · All rights reserved T H E A U T H O R Joan Sánchez Montero is Doctor in Law by the Autonomous Universi- ty of Barcelona (UAB), Spain and qualified as a lawyer at the Catholic University of Táchira (UCAT) Venezuela. At this Institution she has worked as Research and Postgraduate Coordinator and as Undergrad- uate and Postgraduate Lecturer in penal law and international protec- tion of human rights. She currently lives in Montevideo, Uruguay. This article is based on her Doctoral Dissertation (2008) “The Ob- servance of the Principle of International Legality in the Progressive Development of Crims Against Humanity”, supervised by Dr. Claudia Jiménez Cortés (UAB). A b s tra c T The present work contains a general overview of the sentences of the In- ter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), which have recognised that crimes against humanity are pre-existing in customary law, and do not prescribe, nor can they be subject to amnesty or pardon.
    [Show full text]