INTRODUCTION 

1.1 This Rejoinder is submitted in accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and Procedural Order No. 1. It responds to Mauritius’ Reply of 18 November 2013. The United Kingdom in this Rejoinder, as in its Counter-Memorial, requests the Arbitral Tribunal to find that it is without jurisdiction in respect of the dispute submitted to the Tribunal by Mauritius in its Notification and Statement of Claim. It also, and without prejudice to this principal submission, addresses the merits of Mauritius’ claims. 

A. Preliminary observations 

1.2 In its Reply, Mauritius has sought to portray the jurisdictional issues as secondary matters, relegating these largely to the final Chapter (Chapter 7)1. The strategy, it appears, is to present the case on the merits such that, when the Tribunal finally gets to the questions of jurisdiction, it will not dwell on the very material difficulties that face Mauritius on this score. Thus, in the introductory Chapter of its Reply, Mauritius sets out “six general observations on the UK’s Counter-Memorial”2, not one of which concerns the United Kingdom’s objections to jurisdiction, objections that are central to the present proceedings and hence central in the Counter-Memorial. Instead, each “general observation” is devoted to matters on the merits, while the observations overall seek to portray the United Kingdom as having acted in bad faith in its relations with Mauritius so far as concerns the British Indian Overseas Territory (“BIOT”) / the Chagos Archipelago3, and also in the presentation of its defence before this Tribunal.