IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

UNDER THE ARBITRATION RULES OF THE

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARBITRATION COMMITTEE

BETWEEN:

A. GRANDE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION

Claimant

v.

CMGC CONSTRUCTION

Respondent

NOTICE OF ARBITRATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

B. DEMAND THAT THE DISPUTE BE REFERRED TO ARBITRATION ....................... 4

C. THE NAME AND CONTACT DETAILS OF THE PARTIES......................................... 5

D. IDENTIFICATION OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT THAT IS INVOKED .... 6

 E. REFERENCE TO THE LEGAL INSTRUMENTS IN RELATION TO WHICH THE
DISPUTE ARISES ............................................................................................................. 7

F. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE CLAIM AND THE AMOUNT INVOLVED............... 7

1. Historic Background of the Domod Deposit .......................................................... 8

2. Acquisition and Development of the Domod Uranium Project............................ 10
3. Investment and Exploration Activities at the Domod Uranium Project............... 14 4.
Mongolia's Unlawful Invalidation of the Mining and Exploration Licenses and
Expropriation of Claimants' Rights and Investments in the Domod Project ....... 16
5.
Mongolia Rejects Claimants' Good Faith Efforts to Comply with the Nuclear
Energy Law ........................................................................................................... 20
6.
Mongolian Courts Confirm Illegality of License Invalidation Under Mongolian
Law ....................................................................................................................... 22
7.
The Legal Basis for the Energy Charter Treaty Claims........................................ 24 8.
The Legal Basis for the Claims under the Foreign Investment Law, Founding
Agreement, and under Mongolian Law ................................................................ 28
9. Mongolia's Breach of the Energy Charter Treaty, the Foreign Investment Law, the
Founding Agreement and Mongolian Law ..................................................... 31
10. The Amounts Sought ............................................................................................ 33

G. RELIEF OR REMEDY SOUGHT ................................................................................... 33

H. NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR .......................................... 34

NOTICE OF ARBITRATION

Claimant alleges as follows:

A. INTRODUCTION

1. Claimant, A. Grande Development Corporation, owned by Judy Queen N. Cajipo, brings this

action against respondent CMGC Construction, for failure to complete a thirty-storey

residential building project at 281 Cor. Zedd and Lauv Streets, Tacloban City which led A.
 Grande Development Corporation to grant several extensions and a final extension, contrary

to the contract of agreement signed by the parties.

2. Claimant, A. Grande Development Corporation hired CMGC Construction, with business

address at 18th Street, May Residences, Tacloban City , Leyte, to construct a thirty-storey

residential building at 281 Cor. Zedd and Lauv Streets, Tacloban City to be completed not

later than 1,705 calendar days reckoned from the 15th calendar day from receipt by the

contractor, Meryll Sheena U. Baqueros, of the Notice to Proceed.

3. A. Grande Development Corporation issued a Notice of Award/Notice to Proceed to its

chosen contractor, CMGC Construction, on July 22, 2005. Thereafter, the parties executed

a Building Construction Agreement (Agreement) on November 17, 2005. Under the

Agreement, CMGC Construction had the obligation to complete the project not later than

1,705 calendar days reckoned from the 15th calendar day from receipt of the Notice of

Award/Notice to Proceed on July 22, 2005, or until February 19, 2006.

4. For the completion of the project, A. Grande Development Corporation undertook to pay

CMGC Construction a lump sum contract price of Php 370,200,000.00 inclusive of

applicable taxes, supply and transportation of materials, and labor. It was agreed that this

contract price shall be subject to the following payment scheme: . (1) A. Grande

Development Corporation shall, upon a written request of CMGC Construction, which shall

be submitted as a contract document, make an advance payment to CMGC Construction in

an amount equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the total contract price to be paid in lump

sum, known as the Mobilization Fee. (2) The advance payment shall be made only upon
 the submission to and acceptance by A. Grande Development Corporation of an irrevocable

standby letter of credit of equivalent value from a local reputable bank, a bank guarantee

or a surety bond callable upon demand, issued an insurance company, duly licensed by the

Insurance Commission. The advance payment shall be repaid by CMGC Construction by

deducting fifteen percent (15%) from his periodic progress payments. (3) A. Grande

Development Corporation shall retain 15% of the total contract price and will be released

upon turn-over to A. Grande Development Corporation of the finished project.

5. Upon A. Grande’s payment of the stipulated 15% mobilization fee in the amount of

₱74,040,000, CMGC Construction commenced with the construction of the project. The

contract price was paid and the retention money was deducted, both in the progress

billings. The project, however, was not completed on the initial completion date of

_____SHEENA NALITO AK HAN TIME OF COMPLETION HAAT CONTRACT KY

MAYDA TERM NA RECKONED WITH KEMEDO HAHA ________, which led A.

Grande to grant several extensions and a final extension until October 15, 2006.

6. As of the last billing A. Grande had already paid an amount corresponding to 93.18%

accomplishment rate of the project and retained an amount as retention bond. However,

the project was not completed on the last extension given. Thus, A, Grande terminated its

contract with CMGC Construction. No progress billing was adduced for the period until

the termination of the contract.

7. CMGC Construction demanded from A. Grande payment of the balance of the contract

price.
8. Claimant, A. Grande prays for the payment of liquidated damages in the amount of

₱11,959,107.60 for the 44-day delay in the completion of the project reckoned from

October 15, 2006 up to the termination of the Agreement on November 28, 2006; for

actual damages in the sum of ₱573,012.81; and for attorney's fees of ₱500,000.00 and

litigation expenses of ₱100,000.00.24

B. DEMAND THAT THE DISPUTE BE REFERRED TO ARBITRATION

(1) The Arbitration Clause

This arbitration is initiated pursuant to the arbitration agreement found at Article 12 of the

Contract, which provides as follows:

“Any and all disputes from the implementation of this Construction Agreement shall

be submitted to arbitration in the Philippines according to the Provisions of Republic Act

876 otherwise known as the Arbitration Law. Provided, however, that disputes that are

within the competence the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) to

resolve shall be referred thereto. The process of arbitration provided under Republic Act

876 shall be deemed incorporated to the provisions of this Contract Agreement. Provided,

further, that by mutual agreement, the parties may agree in writing to resort to other

alternative modes of dispute resolution. The arbitral award and any decision rendered

herein shall be appealed by way of petition for review. In the event of litigation that either

party may resort to, the venue of the action shall be at the appropriate courts in the City

of Tacloban to the exclusion of other venues.”

 (2) Place of Arbitration

Pursuant to Article 12 set out above, the place of the arbitration is Tacloban City,

Philippines.

C. THE PARTIES

1. Claimant

Claimant is A. Grande Development Corporation, a company registered under the laws of the
Philippines with its registered office located at 145 Honeymoon Avenue, Tacloban City,
Leyte. A. Grande Development Corporation is a residential services firm which maximizes the
potential income of property investment by delivering world-class homes to individuals and
other corporate clients. A. Grande Corporation also offers a variety of residential properties that
can cater to different preferences and locations, delivers a concierge-like partner that can cater
to the tenant’s leasing, maintenance, and financial management needs and assists in locating
quality housing within the vicinities of their workpaces through its wide network of property
developers and owners with over 20,000 employees and 18 million in revenue.

Claimant’s address is:

CLAIMANT

A. Grande Development Corporation

145 Honeymoon Avenue
Tacloban City, Leyte
325-1442
+63-53-93426481
agrandedevcorp@gmail.com

The Claimant is represented in this arbitration by:

HSC Law Offices

Atty. Irithel G. Moba
 Fifth Avenue
Tacloban City, Leyte
321-7363
+63-53-1221145
hsclawoffices@gmail.com

2. Respondent

The Respondent is CMGC Construction a company registered under the laws of the

Philippines,with its registered office located at 18th Street, May Residences, Tacloban

City , Leyte, duly represented by its proprietor, Meryll Sheena U. Baqueros, herein

referred to as the contractor. CMGC Construction’s activities include transportation

infrastructure projects such as roads, railways or airports. Another main sector of CMGC

is building construction/projects for administration, business, education and residential

purposes with over 10,000 employees.

Respondent’s contact information is:

RESPONDENT

CMGC Construction
18th Street, May Residences
Tacloban City, Leyte
321-8735
+63-53-9674432
cmgccons@gmail.com

D. IDENTIFICATION OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT THAT IS

INVOKED

A. Grande Development Corporation invokes Article 12 of the contract and asserts

claims under the said article. CMGC’s consent to submit the present dispute to arbitration
 which is also set out under the said article. Likewise, A. Grande Development

Corporation invoke Section 2 of Republic Act 876 or the Arbitration Law which also

provides for the resolution of disputes by arbitration which are deemed incorporated with

the Contract Agreement as well as Rule 4, Section 4.1 of the CIAC Revised Rules of

Procedure Governing Construction Arbitration.

By invoking Article 12 of the Contract Agreement between the claimant and respondent,

Section 2 of Republic Act 876 and Rule 4, Section 4.1 of the CIAC Revised Rules of

Procedure Governing Construction Arbitration, claimant notes that the dispute resolution

provisions of these documents are expressly accepted by the Arbitration Law. Claimants’

consent to submit the present dispute to arbitration under Republic Act 876 otherwise

known as the Arbitration Law provided that the dispute is within the competence

jurisdiction of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) by serving

this Notice of Arbitration.

E. REFERENCE TO THE LEGAL INSTRUMENTS IN RELATION TO WHICH THE

DISPUTE ARISES

The dispute arises in part out of the Contract Agreement, the obligations of which

respondent have breached. Of relevance to this dispute, the Contract Agreement was

executed by A. Grande Development Corporation (A. Grande) , a corporation formed under

the laws of the Philippines, and CMGC Construction (CMGC) a construction company.

The dispute also arises out of Republic Act 876 or the Arbitration Law , which CMGC

Construction breached by, _________________________________.

F. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE CLAIM AND THE AMOUNT INVOLVED

G. RELIEF OR REMEDY SOUGHT

Without prejudice to its rights to amend, supplement or restate the relief to be requested in the

arbitration, claimant request the Tribunal to:

(1) Declare that Respondent have respectively breached the terms of the Contract

Agreement and Republic Act 876;

(2) Award Claimant monetary damages of not less than

_____________________ in compensation for all of their losses sustained

as a result of being deprived of their rights under terms of the Contract

Agreement and Republic Act 876, including, inter alia, reasonable lost

profits, direct and indirect losses (including, without limitation, loss of

reputation and goodwill) and losses of all tangible and intangible property

caused by Respondent;

(3) Award all costs (including, without limitation, attorneys' and all other

professional fees) associated with any and all proceedings undertaken in

connection with this arbitration, including all such costs undertaken to

investigate this matter and prepare this Notice of Arbitration, and all such costs

expended by Claimant in attempting to resolve this matter amicably with

Respondent before serving this Notice of Arbitration;

(4) Award pre-and post-judgment interest at a rate to be fixed by the Tribunal;

 and

(5) Grant such other relief as counsel may advise or the Tribunal may deem

appropriate.

H. NOTIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR

In accordance with Rule 9 of Section 9.1 of Republic Act 876 and Section 9 of the CIAC

Revised Rules of Procedure Governing Construction Arbitration, Claimant observed that a

Tribunal of one or three arbitrators may be appointed to settle a dispute in accordance with

the provisions of the CIAC Revised Rules of Procedure Governing Construction Arbitration

which provides: “The parties shall submit the name/s of not more than six (6) nominees

from CIAC accredited arbitrators in the order of their preference for appointment as

arbitrators. The common nominee/s of the parties shall be appointed, subject to their

availability and other considerations. In the absence of an agreement on the number of

arbitrators, CIAC taking into consideration the complexities and intricacies of the

dispute/s or the sum involved, has the option to appoint a Sole Arbitrator or an Arbitral

Tribunal. In case of multiple parties, whether as Claimant or as Respondent, including

three (3) or more parties in the arbitration, where all parties are unable to agree to a

method for constitution of the Tribunal within ten (10) days from notice, CIAC shall

appoint the arbitrators.”

Pursuant to Rule 9 of Section 9.1 of Republic Act 87 6 and Section 9 of the CIAC Revised

Rules of Procedure Governing Construction Arbitration , the Claimant hereby appoint Mr.
 Reginald Forteza, a national of the Philippines, to serve as arbitrator in this arbitration.

Mr. Forteza has confirmed to counsel that he is and shall remain impartial and

independent of the parties during the pendency of the arbitration.

DATE OF ISSUE:

9 March 2019
By:________________________________

SERVED ON:

CMGC CONSTRUCTION

Meryll Sheena U. Baqueros

Proprietor/Contactor
18th Street, May Residences
Tacloban City , Leyte