Примеры использования Amended claim на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Amended claim.
NIOC's amended claim 46.
Amended claim amount USD.
Supplements or amended claims.
In the amended claim, SAT capitalized a minor portion of its JO costs and expensed the balance of these costs.
Supplements or amended claims.
In the amended claim, SAT requests compensation in the amount of US$47,490,480 for the losses to its Mina Saud physical facilities.
Supplements or amended claims.
In the amended claim, SAT requests compensation in the amount of US$72,171,021 for losses to its physical assets at Mina Saud and Wafra.
Supplements or amended claims 24 12.
During this period, any such applicant may submit an amended claim.
The original and amended claims are itemized in the following table.
Comparison of SAT's original and amended claims 89.
In 1997, SAT filed an amended claim that increased the amount of its claim to US$1,519,952,314 the“amended claim”.
Notwithstanding the reservation of this right, PIC did not file an amended claim to include this type of loss.
As noted above, however, in the amended claim much of these costs were addressed in the context of the business interruption claim. .
Some of SAT's physical asset reconstruction costs at Mina Saud were removed from the physical assets claim element in the amended claim.
The amended claim also contained three elements: losses to physical assets, extraordinary expenses and a“business interruption” claim. .
For the same reasons, the value of SAT's refinery at Mina Saud does not appear in the amended claim as part of the physical assets claim element.
In particular, NIOC alleged andoffered to prove that losses suffered by certain of its divisions were substantially larger than those reflected in its amended claim.
The Panel does not consider that the approach to valuation used by SAT in its amended claim is appropriate for losses of this nature for several reasons that are discussed below.
After reviewing SAT's submissions, however,the Panel concludes that the evidence does not support SAT's claim for lost profits as presented in its amended claim.
The economic reality of SAT's amended claim is that SAT requests compensation for income it estimates it would have been able to earn but for the invasion and occupation.
This article should make provision to empower the tribunal to disregard those elements of the supplemented or amended claim or defence, where those elements fall outside the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal.
In the amended claim, SAT adopts a new method of valuing its business loss claim element, resulting in the increase of this claim element to US$1,380,135,392.
Based on the information provided by the claimant during these investigations, the Panel directed that the claim be severed into three separate claims, andthe losses identified in NIOC's amended claim be apportioned among the legal entities identified by the claimant and verified by the Panel in the remainder of this report.
The amended claim amount was accordingly SAR 812,626, the document reflecting the withdrawal erroneously states that the revised claim amount is SAR 891,952.
Unstated The principal differences between the original and amended claims are the result of SAT's decision to abandon the loss of profits approach to business loss valuation in favor of a business interruption approach.
Thus, in the amended claim, the use of the DCF method causes a shift in the claim amounts: the physical assets claim amount is reduced while the business loss claim amount is increased.
With respect to SAT's claim, the Panel finds that SAT's valuation in its amended claim of its lost future earnings does not adhere to the standard and method stipulated by the Governing Council. SAT estimates that it would have increased its cash flows but for the invasion and bases its estimated increase predominantly on its alleged investment programme.