Saint Marys VCNA v. Government of Canada, Consent Award (March 29, 2013)
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1. On May 13, 2011, St Marys VCNA, LLC (the "Claimant") submitted to the Government of Canada (the "Respondent") a Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim to Arbitration under Section B of Chapter Eleven of the North American Free Trade Agreement ("NAFT A").
2. On September 14, 2011, the Claimant served a Notice of Arbitration on the Respondent. The Claimant took the position that this service was in accordance with Articles 3 and 18 of the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, 1976 (the "UNCITRAL Rules", and Articles 1116 and 1120 of the NAFT A (the "NOA"). Canada objected to the NOA on the basis that it failed to respect the timing requirements ofNAFTA Article 1120(1).
3. In the NOA, the Claimant sought compensation under NAFTA Chapter Eleven for damages it alleged arose out of a decision on the part of the Government of Ontario to adopt a Minister's Zoning Order and subsequent Declaration of Provincial Interest, in respect of a site owned by St. Marys Cement Inc. (Canada) ("SMC") in the vicinity of Hamilton, Ontario, along with related decisions by relevant provincial and local authorities (the "Claims").
4. On December 22, 2011, the Respondent notified the Claimant of its jurisdictional concerns arising under NAFT A Article 1113(2) (Denial of Benefits), requesting documents confirming Claimant's ownership structure, assets, holdings, and business activities in the United States. The Respondent also notified the United States Department of State that subject to delivery by the Claimant of satisfactory evidence of its US business activities, it would deny to the Claimant the benefits ofNAFTA Chapter Eleven.