1. With reference to their reservation of rights in their letter of 18 March 2015, on 29 April 2015, the Claimants filed a Second Request for Production of Documents in Document Authenticity Phase (the “Second Request”). On 30 April 2015, the Tribunal invited the Respondent to provide its views on the admissibility of the Second Request by 4 May 2015, which it did. While agreeing to produce documents responsive to requests Nos. 2 and 6, as well as documents from the Nusantara Group responsive to requests Nos. 1, 3, and 4, the Respondent objected to the admissibility of the Second Request essentially because it was untimely, as the Claimants had sufficient knowledge of the facts at issue to ask for these documents in their first document production request (the “First Request”). The Respondent also objected that the requested documents are broad and thus too burdensome.
2. Having considered the elements on record, the Tribunal (i) reserved its decision on the admissibility of the Second Request, and (ii) invited the Parties to address the merits of the requests and, in this context, add any further observations they deemed appropriate on timeliness, especially on whether the Claimants could have made these requests in the First Request.
3. In accordance with the directions of the Tribunal, the Respondent filed its objections on 19 May 2015 and the Claimants their replies on 25 May 2015.
4. The present Order deals with the Second Request and addresses first its admissibility (II) and then the applicable standards (III), before reaching its decision (IV).