INTRODUCTION

While I agree with the Decision on Jurisdiction (“the Decision”) to the extent that the Objections to Jurisdiction cannot be accepted at this stage (the jurisdiction stage), I am of the view that some critical issues involved can be properly determined only after consideration of evidence, which may be presented at the merits stage. I am, therefore, setting out below reasons for my Separate Opinion.

I. FACTS RELEVANT TO JURISDICTION

a. Parties

1. The statement in paragraph 1 of the Decision that Claimants are members of a group of companies known collectively as the Grupo Marsans does not substantiate or clarify the averments in paragraph 2 of the Claimants’ Memorial on Merits dated 29.9.2012 (“CMM”) to the effect that the Claimants purchased Argentine Airlines in 2001 and owned and operated them until the Argentine Government nationalized them in 2008. These averments remain unproven assertions and would have to be proved by production of evidence. The rejection of Objections to Jurisdiction, therefore, is subject to the power reserved by the Tribunal to conclusively determine the objections after consideration of the evidence presented at the merits stage.