【案情简介】
2016年5月11日，申请人（一家西班牙公司、委托人）与被申请人（一家中国公司）达成制作服务协议。协议约定由被申请人委托申请人为被申请人于2016年7月和8月在巴西里约提供（电视质量）视频制作服务，为里约奥运会之用。之后，被申请人向申请人支付了约定的首付款。2016年6月20日，被申请人收到申请人寄送的第二笔服务费xxx欧元的发票。2016年10月14日，被申请人确认同意申请人提出的变更服务费的建议，双方达成一致意见。2016年12月16日，被申请人收到申请人寄送的第三笔服务费yyy欧元的发票，对所收到的发票没有异议。2017年6月13日，被申请人的负责人与申请人的代理人王轩军律师和罗春利律师签署了《协商备忘录》，被申请人确认尚欠申请人服务费zzz欧元（为上述第二笔和第三笔服务费发票金额之和）。2017年11月3日，瑞士法律教授就本案实体法出具法律意见书。2018年1月15日，被申请人向申请人出具确认函，确认申请人交付的专题片已经投入使用，没有异议，并且确认尚欠申请人服务费zzz欧元,但不付款。2018年1月22日之前，申请人的负责人按制作服务协议第8.1条款（仲裁前置协商条款）与被申请人负责人协商要求付款，未果。2018年1月22日，申请人向中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会（简称“CIETAC”、“贸仲”）提交仲裁文件，申请仲裁。2018年6月15日，基于申请人提出的财产保全申请，仲裁庭收到北京第三中级人民法院的财产保全裁定书。2018年8月22日，在履行公证送达后仲裁庭开庭审理（被申请人缺席）。2018年10月31日，中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会出具裁决书，全部支持了申请人的仲裁请求。
【仲裁策略】
北京市盈科律师事务所王轩军律师、罗春利律师接受申请人的委托，担任其委托代理人，考虑按下列策略提供代理服务：
1、向委托人提供客观分析意见。由于本案双方当事人协议约定了仲裁条款和仲裁前置程序，王轩军律师和罗春利律师针对仲裁条款的有效性以及仲裁前置程序的履行等为委托人提交了初步分析意见。该分析意见应客观，尤其是在仲裁条款是否有效存在两种可能性的情况下，应将两种可能性的情况及相应的原因如实告知委托人。
2、启动正式法律程序前，收集委托人不能提供但却是必要的证据。代理人了解到，本案被申请人可能缺席，对委托人举证责任提出了更高的要求。因此在申请仲裁之前，应尽可能为委托人固定、保留、收集可能的一切证据，特别是收集委托人不能提供但却是必要的证据（如被申请人明确欠款的证据、委托人提供服务的证据、委托人履行仲裁前置程序的证据），以支持委托人的仲裁请求。
3、尽可能一次性告知委托人应办理的相关手续。本案涉及外国公司和外国法律，以及多个程序包括仲裁、财产保全和执行等程序，需要办理的手续较多，因此应尽可能充分考虑可能发生的情形，一次性告知委托人应办理的相关手续，以节省费用成本和时间成本。
4、系统地分析和整理文件，便于仲裁员理解和认同申请人的观点。本案文件资料很多，其中需要提交仲裁庭的文件就达数百页。对各类文件应分析，分门别类进行系统整理，做好文件目录和证据目录，便于仲裁员理解、知悉并认同申请人的请求和依据。
5、及时对委托人进行必要的风险提示。本案中委托人的风险有仲裁协议被认定无效的风险、举证不能的风险、仲裁请求不能获得仲裁庭支持的风险、不能实际保全被申请人财产的风险、获胜裁决不能执行的风险等。对此等风险，代理律师都应及时书面向委托人提示。
【工作成果（文书）摘录】
在本案中，王轩军律师和罗春利律师提交了很多法律文书，其中主要法律文书包括：Application for Arbitration（《仲裁申请书》）、Applicationfor Property Preservation《财产保全申请书》、Power of Attorney《授权委托书》、Reasons for CIETAC’s Jurisdiction over Arbitration Case(《贸仲对案件有管辖权的理由说明书》)、Preconditions For Arbitration Are Satisfied(《仲裁前置条件满足的说明书》)、Explanation for Interest on latepayments(《延期付款利息解释说明书》)、Statement of Attorney(《代理词》)。由于《财产保全申请书》和《授权委托书》不仅需要向贸仲提交，也需要向法院提交，故用中文和英文两种语言书写，其他文件仅用英文书写，但当事人名称注明中文。具体展示如下。
Application for Arbitration
Claimant: **Company (Chinese Name: **公司), a company incorporated and existing under the laws of Kingdom ofSpain.
Domicile: **,Spain
Tel: +34 ** Fax: +34 ** Email: **
Person incharge: Mr. **, President
Arbitration Agents：
Mr. WangXuanjun, Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm, Tel: (86) 139 0109 1991
Mr. Luo Chunli,Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm, Tel: (86) 138 1111 0161
Respondent: ** Co., Ltd. (Chinese Name：**有限公司), a company incorporated and existingunder the laws of the People’s Republic of China.Uniform Social Credit Code: **.
Domicile: **,China. （in Chinese： **）
Contactaddress: **, China. （in Chinese：**）
Person incharge: **, General Manager
Contact Person:**, Tel: (86) **，Email：**
The Arbitration Clause:
The arbitrationclause—Article 8.2 of the PRODUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT signedby and between the Claimant and the Respondent reads: " NotwithstandingArticle 8.1 herein, any dispute between the Parties in connection with thisMoU, if not promptly resolved by the Parties, shall be settled by arbitrationin Beijing under the Rules of Arbitration of the China Chamber of InternationalCommerce by a single arbitrator appointed in accordance with the said Rules.Any arbitral award shall be final and binding on the Parties and shall benon-appealable. The arbitral proceedings shall be conducted in English and thearbitral award shall be issued in the English language. In any arbitration orin any proceedings for the enforcement of any judgment, order, ruling or awardgranted therein, the losing Party shall pay the attorneys’ fees and legal costsincurred by the winning Party. Notwithstanding the above, either Party mayrequest a court of competent jurisdiction to order any provisional orconservatory measure (including injunctive relief) either prior to theinstitution of the arbitration proceeding or during such proceeding for thepreservation of its rights and interests".
(DetailedReasons for CIETAC’s Jurisdiction over this case arewritten separately.)
Arbitration Claims:
1. The Respondent shall pay the Claimant EUR XXas the balance of service fees.
2. The Respondent shall pay the Claimantinterest on late payment, which shall be levied at the rate of 0.0072% per dayfrom 20th July, 2016 and 16th December, 2016 until full payment is received bythe Claimant, based on the principal amount of XX Euros and XX Eurosrespectively. (Temporary total interest on late payment is XX Euros until 11thAugust, 2017).
3. The Respondent shall pay the Claimant XX RMBto compensate legal costs.
4. The Respondent shall bear the arbitration feeof this case.
The Facts and Reasons:
ProductionServices Agreement dated March 18, 2016, were actually signed by the Respondenton April 26, 2016 and signed by the Claimant on May 11, 2016 (hereinafterreferred to as the Agreement). The Agreement mainly provided that Claimantshould provide video production services (TV quality) to Respondent in Rio deJaneiro, Brazil in July and August 2016 and the Respondent should pay servicefees to the Claimant.
The Claimanthas fulfilled any and all obligations provided by the Agreement, but the Respondenthas not fulfilled all obligations of payment to the Claimant according toprovisions by the Agreement. The Claimant sent the Respondent invoice No.015-2016-1 amounting to XX Euros and invoice No. 040-2016-1 amounting to XXEuros. The Respondent received two invoices respectively on 20th June, 2016 and16th November, 2016 and should pay the Claimant XX Euros on 20th July, 2016 andXX Euros on 16th December, 2016, according to Article 3.4 of the Agreement.Although the Claimant contacted the Respondent many times via email, face toface meeting, etc., in the attempt to get said outstanding payment and relatedinterests, the Claimant still has not received the payment from the Respondentup to now.
According toprovisions of Article 8.1 of the Agreement, the Claimant has tried to resolvethe dispute on the outstanding payment, prior to the Claimant resorting toarbitration, but failed. (Detailed description and related evidences areprovided separately).
The Applicationis hereby respectfully submitted to China International Economic and TradeArbitration Commission.
Claimant: ** (seal)
**(signature)
[date]
Application forProperty Preservation
财产保全申请书
Claimant: ***Company, a company incorporated and existing under the laws of Kingdom of Spain.
申请人：**公司，一家依据西班牙王国法律成立和存续的公司。
Domicile:***, Spain
住所：西班牙***
Tel电话: +34 *** Fax传真: +34 ***
Email电子信箱: ***
Person in charge: Mr. ***, President
负责人：***，总裁
Agents：
申请人代理人：
Mr. Wang Xuanjun, Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm,Tel: (86) 139 0109 1991
Mr. Luo Chunli, Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm, Tel: (86) 138 1111 0161
王轩军 北京市盈科律师事务所律师 电话：(86) 139 01091991
罗春利 北京市盈科律师事务所律师 电话：(86) 138 11110161
Respondent: *** Co., Ltd., a companyincorporated and existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China. Uniform Social Credit Code: ***.
被申请人：***有限公司，一家依据中华人民共和国法律成立和存续的公司，统一社会信用代码：***
Domicile: ***, China.
注册地址：中国***
Contact address: ***, China.
联系地址：中国***
Person in charge: ***, GeneralManager
法定代表人：***，职务：总经理
Contact Person: **
联系人：**
Tel电话: (86) ***，Email电子信箱：***
Property Preservation Claims:
保全请求：
Applying for taking property preservation measures to the property ofRespondent. The amount of application is EUR XXX in the bank account ofRespondent or other equivalent value of the property. (Clues of property areattached)
请求对被申请人名下财产采取财产保全措施，保全数额为被申请人名下XXX欧元的银行账户内资金或价值相当的其他财产。（后附财产线索）
The Facts and Reasons：
事实与理由：
Production Services Agreement dated March 18, 2016, were actually signed bythe Respondent on April 26, 2016 and signed by the Claimant on May 11, 2016(hereinafter referred to as the Agreement). The Agreement mainly provided thatClaimant should provide video production services (TV quality) to Respondent inRio de Janeiro, Brazil in July and August 2016 and the Respondent should payservice fees to the Claimant.
申请人与被申请人于2016年达成制作服务协议（简称协议），该协议标明日期为2016年3月18日，被申请人签署日期为2016年4月26日，申请人签署日期为2016年5月11日。协议主要约定，申请人应当于2016年7月和8月在巴西里约为被申请人提供视频制作服务（电视质量），被申请人应当向申请人支付服务费。
The Claimant has fulfilled any and all obligations provided by theAgreement, but the Respondent has not fulfilled all obligations of payment tothe Claimant according to provisions by the Agreement. The Respondent shouldpay the Claimant due payment ofoutstanding balance of two unpaid bills in the exact amount of XXX Eurosand related interests, according to Article 3.3 of the Agreement. Although theClaimant contacted the Respondent many times via email, face to face meeting,etc., in the attempt to get said outstanding payment and related interests, theClaimant still has not received the payment from the Respondent up to now.
申请人已经完成了协议约定的全部义务，但是被申请人并没有依据协议向申请人完成付款的全部义务。依据协议第3.3条的约定，被申请人应向申请人支付两个账单应付未付金额XXX欧元的服务费及相关利息。尽管申请人多次通过邮件和会面等方式要求被申请人支付上述款项及相应利息，但申请人至今也未收到被申请人的上述付款和利息。
According to provisions of Article 8.1 of the Agreement, the Claimant hastried to resolve the dispute on the outstanding payment, prior to the Claimantresorting to arbitration, but failed.
在申请仲裁之前，申请人依据协议第8.1条约定试图解决未付款项的争议，但是失败了。
Now the Claimant has applied for arbitration against the Respondentconcerning the dispute. In order to successfully enforce the award to beissued, the Claimant applies for preservation of property of the Respondent.
现申请人已就上述争议对被申请人申请仲裁，为了防止被申请人恶意转移财产造成裁决难以执行的后果，特申请保全被申请人的相应财产，望予准许。
The Applicationis hereby respectfully submitted to Beijing People’s Court.
此致
北京市 人民法院
Claimant: ** Company (seal)
申请人：**公司（章）
***(signature)
***（签字）
Date：
日期：
Clues of Property：
财产线索：
1. The bank account information of Respondent被申请人账户信息：
Bank name: ***
银行名称：***
Account No.账号：***
Power of Attorney
授权委托书
Principal：** Company
委托人：**公司
Domicile: **,Spain
住所：西班牙**
Tel电话: +34 ** Fax传真: +34 **
Email电子信箱: **
Person in charge:Mr. **, President
负责人：**，总裁
Agents：
代理人：
Mr. Wang Xuanjun, Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm, Tel:(86) 139 0109 1991
Mr.Luo Chunli, Lawyer, Beijing Yingke Law Firm, Tel: (86) 138 1111 0161
王轩军 北京市盈科律师事务所律师 电话：(86) 139 01091991
罗春利 北京市盈科律师事务所律师 电话：(86) 138 11110161
ThePrincipal hereby authorizes the above mentioned agents to represent, assist and defend the Principal, accordingto the terms and conditions of this Power of Attorney, in the dispute relatingto Production Services Agreement between the Principal and ** Co. Ltd.，before law court and/or arbitral tribunal.
委托人特此授权上述代理人代理本公司在法院和/或仲裁程序中处理与**有限公司之间因制作服务协议引起的争议案。
The said Agents shall have all the powersincluding, but without limitation of generality of the foregoing, thepowers:
上述代理人的代理权限范围包括但不限于：
1. To file application for arbitration.
申请仲裁；
2. To raise, admit, abandon, modifying any arbitration claims,choosing arbitrator(s), to participate in mediation and reach settlementagreements with the opposite party in the arbitration procedure.
提出、承认、放弃、变更仲裁请求，选定仲裁员，在仲裁程序中与对方和解、参与调解；
3. To institute proceedings by petition or any legal paperas foreseen by procedure, in the first degree and the second degree，beforelaw court;
向法院提出起诉、上诉
4.To apply for property preservation, and to apply for enforcement of arbitralaward and judgment, before law court.
向法院申请财产保全、申请强制执行仲裁裁决和法院判决；
5.To raise, admit, abandon, modifying any litigation claims, to participate inmediation and reach settlement agreements with the opposite party in thelitigation procedure.
提出、承认、放弃、变更诉讼请求，在诉讼程序中与对方和解、参与调解；
6. To make presentations and debates atoral hearings,
出庭陈述、辩论；
7. To submit, receive legal documentson behalf of the Principal.
代为递交、接收法律文书；
8.to sign, on behalf of the Principal, the legal documents (including but notlimited to: application for arbitration, complaint and appeal related to lawcourt, application for enforcement of arbitral award and judgment, applicationfor property preservation, etc.)
代委托人签署法律文书（包括但不限于：仲裁申请书、起诉状、上诉状、强制执行法院判决和仲裁裁决的申请书、财产保全申请书等）。
Principal: ** Company（seal）
委托人：**公司（章）
Person in charge: Mr. **（signature）
负责人：**（签字）
Date：
日期：
Reasons for CIETAC’s Jurisdictionover Arbitration Case
*** (Claimant) vs. ***(Respondent)
To:China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission （CIETAC）
Concerning the arbitration case *** Company (Claimant)vs.***Company (Respondent), Claimant thinks that CIETAC has jurisdiction over the case accordingto thefollowingarbitration clause of PRODUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) between the Claimant and theRespondent:
ArbitrationClause - Article 8.2 of the Agreement reads:
“NotwithstandingArticle 8.1 herein, Any dispute between the Parties in connection with thisMoU, if not promptly resolved by the Parties, shall be settled by arbitrationin Beijing under the Rules of Arbitration of the China Chamber of InternationalCommerce by a single arbitrator appointed in accordance with the said Rules.Any arbitral award shall be final and binding on the Parties and shall benon-appealable. The arbitral proceedings shall be conducted in English and thearbitral award shall be issued in the English language. In any arbitration orin any proceedings for the enforcement of any judgment, order, ruling or awardgranted therein, the losing Party shall pay the attorneys’ fees and legal costs incurred by the winning Party. Notwithstandingthe above, either Party may request a court of competent jurisdiction to orderany provisional or conservatory measure (including injunctive relief) eitherprior to the institution of the arbitration proceeding or during suchproceeding for the preservation of its rights and interests.”
The exact reasons for CIETAC’s jurisdiction over the present case Claimantvs. Respondent are as followings:
1. Preconditionsfor arbitration are satisfied. According to Article 8.1 of the Agreement, thedispute shall be referred for resolution first to Mr. M of Claimant (or anyother person designated by Claimant) and Mr. L of Respondent. In fact, Mr. Mand Mr. G of Claimant attempted to solve the outstanding payment dispute withMr. Y and Mr. L (authorized representative of Respondent) many times, butRespondent failed to take any effective measures.
(1)On3rd November 2016, Mr. G sent a notice to Respondent (mail recipient: Mr. Y)requesting Respondent to fulfill its obligation of XXX Euros payment includingthe second installment amounting to XXX Euros and the third installmentamounting to xxx Euros.【Claimant’s Evidence 6】
(2)On13th June 2017, Claimant had signed the Memorandum of Negotiation in Chinese toask Respondent to pay the outstanding service payment and interest. 【Claimant’s Evidence 9】
(3)On7th August 2017, Mr. M has sent the Notice of Request for Resolution ofDispute to Mr. L by email, in according with the Article 8.1 of theAgreement.【Claimant’s Evidence 10】On 22ndDecember 2017, Mr. Wang Xuanjun on behalf of Claimant has sent again the said Noticeof Request for Resolution of Dispute to Mr. L by registered mail with Mr. Yas receiver, in according with the Article 15.1 of the Agreement.【Claimant’s Evidence 11】However, up to now,Mr. L fails to give any feedback to Claimant.
2. Normally Memorandum of Understanding “MoU” describes a bilateral or multilateralagreement between two or more parties. It is difficult to understand that “this MoU” (“谅解备忘录”inChinese) mentioned in the above Article 8.2 of the Agreement is other documentthan “this Agreement”.Therefore Claimant thinks that “this MoU” (“谅解备忘录”in Chinese) is do the “PRODUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT” signed byClaimant and Respondent.
3. Accordingto provision by Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of China International Economic andTrade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) Arbitration Rules, as indicated below, the name “China Chamber of International Commerce”used in Article 8.2 of the Agreement should be deemed as the name of “CIETAC”.Therefore, the Rules of Arbitration of the China Chamber ofInternational Commerce should be CIETAC Arbitration Rules.
Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of CIETAC ArbitrationRules provides:
“Where an arbitrationagreement provides for arbitration by the China Council for the Promotion ofInternational Trade/China Chamber of International Commerce, or by theArbitration Commission or the Arbitration Institute of the China Council forthe Promotion of International Trade/China Chamber of International Commerce, orrefers to CIETAC’s previous names, it shall be deemedthat the parties have agreed to arbitration by CIETAC.”
4. According to Paragraph 4 of Article 4 ofCIETAC Arbitration Rules as indicated below, CIEATC has jurisdiction over thedispute between Claimant and Respondent, since both parties agree to refertheir dispute to arbitration under the Rules ofArbitration of the China Chamber of International Commerce (i.e. CIETACArbitration Rules) without providing the name of the arbitration institution.
Paragraph 4 ofArticle 4 of CIETAC Arbitration Rules provides:
“Where the partiesagree to refer their dispute to arbitration under these Rules without providingthe name of the arbitration institution, they shall be deemed to have agreed torefer the dispute to arbitration by CIETAC.”
Insummary:
The preconditions for arbitration are satisfied. The Rules of Arbitration of the China Chamber ofInternational Commerce should be CIETAC Arbitration Rules.CIEATC hasjurisdiction over the present case since both parties agree to refer theirdispute to arbitration under CIETAC ArbitrationRules without providing the name of the arbitration institution, accordingto Paragraph 4 of Article 4 of CIETAC Arbitration Rules.
Claimant: ***Company
Arbitration agents:
Wang Xuanjun, Luo Chunli, of Beijing YingkeLaw Firm
January 2, 2018
Preconditions For Arbitration Are Satisfied
*** (Claimant) vs. *** (Respondent)
To: China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission(CIETAC)
The preconditions are satisfied for **Company (Claimant)to apply for Arbitration concerning the dispute between **Company and *** Co., Ltd(Respondent). The exact reasons are followings:
1. Thepreconditions for arbitration
Theclause of the preconditions for arbitration - Article 8.1 of the PRODUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) signed by and between the Claimant and the Respondent reads:
“The Dispute shall be referred for resolution first to Mr. M ofClaimant (or any other person designated by Claimant) and Mr. L of Respondent.Such procedure shall be invoked by either Claimant or Respondent presenting tothe other Party a "Notice of Request for Resolution of Dispute" (a"Notice") identifying the issues in dispute sought to be addressedhereunder. A meeting of designates at a mutually agreed upon location will beheld within five (5) days after the delivery of the Notice.”
2. According to above mentioned Article 8.1, thedispute shall be referred for resolution first to Mr. M of Claimant (or anyother person designated by Claimant) and Mr. L of Respondent. In fact, Mr. M and Mr. G of Claimantattempted to solve the outstanding payment dispute with Mr. Y and Mr. L(authorized representative of Respondent) many times, but Respondent failed totake any effective measures.
(1)On 3rd November 2016, Mr. G sent a notice toRespondent (mail recipient: Mr. Y) requesting Respondent to fulfill itsobligation of XX Euros payment including the second installment amounting to XXEuros and the third installment amounting to XX Euros. 【Claimant’s Evidence 7】
(2)On 13th June 2017, Claimant signed theMemorandum of Negotiation in Chinese to ask Respondent to pay the outstandingservice payment and interest. 【Claimant’sEvidence 10】
(3)On 7th August 2017, Mr. M has sent the Noticeof Request for Resolution of Dispute to Mr. L by email, in according with theArticle 8.1 of the Agreement.【Claimant’sEvidence 11】On 22nd December 2017, Mr. Wang Xuanjun on behalf ofClaimant has sent again the said Notice of Request for Resolution of Dispute to Mr. L by registered mail with Mr. Y as receiver, in according with the Article 15.1 of theAgreement.【Claimant’s Evidence 12】However, up to now, Mr. L fails to give any feedback toClaimant.
3. Special remark: Mr. M** and Mr. M*** (differentspelling) are the same person.
Diminutiveof given name “M**” in Spanish is “M***”, according to Behind The Name (website:http://www.behindthename.com/name/***) and Wiktionary(https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/***_of_given_names) (see Claimant’s Evidence 14).
Therefore, the preconditions are satisfied for Claimantto apply for Arbitration before CIETAC.
Claimant: ** Company
Arbitration agents:
Wang Xuanjun, Luo Chunli, of Beijing Yingke Law Firm
January 12, 2018
Explanationfor Interest on Late Payments
1. Related provisions of the Agreement between Claimant and Respondent:
Article 3.3 Fees Payment Terms
Provided that ** Company（Claimant） has complied with itsobligations hereunder and subject to Article 13.4, and the Details included in theAPPENDIX C, *** Co., Ltd(Respondent) will pay ** Company the Fees as follows:
(a)First Installment: Fees A - will bepaid 100% upon contract signature.
(b)Second Installment: 60% of Fees B and C- once the 15 to 20 Athleteslist, whose Features shall be produced by ** Company, is confirmed in written form by the Parties by MARCH 15 2016.
(c)Third Installment: 100% of fee Dand Balance of Fees B and C by the end of AUGUST 2016.
Due to the foreign exchange policy of China, payment of foreign currencywill go through certain statutory step that the payment can be executed withinfifteen (15) working days after invoice is received. Fee payments are net ofany transaction or foreign exchange related costs.
Article 3.4 Payment Documents Required
Separateinvoices for each installment of the Fees, ...... to be paid in thirty (30)days at latest.
Article 3.6 Interest on Late Payments
In the eventof the late payment of any installment of the Fees or any other payments due to**Company under this Agreement, interest will be levied at therate of 3% per annum above Euribor (Euro Interbank Offered Rate) from time totime calculated on a daily basis from the due date until payment is received.
2. Related interest rate
According to Series LevelInformation Concerning Average Of Observations Through Period - Euro And OneMonth Euribor Rate (see Claimant’s Evidence 13), actual rate per day of interest on late payment is 0.0072%.
For example, the actual rate perday for August of 2017 is:
A = actualrate per annum 2.628% = 3% per annum above Euribor (- 0.3720% per annum),according to Article 3.6 of the Agreement between Claimant and Respondent
B = actual rate per day 0.0072% = A / 365 = 2.628% perannum /365
To better understand theinterest rate for period July 2016 to August 2017, please see the table below:
|
Month |
Euribor |
Actual Rate Per Day |
|
2017-08 |
-0.3720% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-07 |
-0.3728% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-06 |
-0.3728% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-05 |
-0.3732% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-04 |
-0.3724% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-03 |
-0.3724% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-02 |
-0.3718% |
0.0072% |
|
2017-01 |
-0.3713% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-12 |
-0.3704% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-11 |
-0.3728% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-10 |
-0.3714% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-09 |
-0.3714% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-08 |
-0.3697% |
0.0072% |
|
2016-07 |
-0.3688% |
0.0072% |
3. Calculation of interest
Respondent received Claimant’s invoice of the second installment for XX Euros on June 20th,2016 (see Claimant’s Evidence 6). So the calculation of interest started at 31st dayafter Respondent’s receipt of theinvoice, which was on July 20th, 2016. Also, Respondent received theinvoice of the third installment for YY Euros on November 16th, 2016(see Claimant’s Evidence7). So the calculation of interest started at 31st day after Respondent’s receipt of the invoice, which was on December 16th,2016. Temporary total interest on late payment is Eur ZZ until 11thAugust 2017.
The exact calculations oftemporary interest up to 11/08/2017 are as followings:
Amount of interest on 2nd Invoice:
A: Invoice Amount: Eur XX
B: Period: From 20/7/2016 to 11/08/2017,total 388 days
C: Amount of interest Eur MM = A x B x 0.0072% =Eur XX x 388 days x 0.0072%
Amount of interest on 3rd Invoice:
D: Invoice Amount: Eur YY
E: Period: From 16/12/2016 to11/08/2017, total 238 days
F: Amount of interest Eur NN = A x B x 0.0072% =Eur YY x 238 days x 0.0072%
TOTAL amount of interest Eur ZZ = C +F = Eur MM + Eur NN
Statement of Attorney
By Wang Xuanjunand Luo Chunli
Claimant’s Arbitration Agents
10 September2018
Case No. ***
Dear distinguished arbitrator,
Concerning the captioned dispute case between ** Company （ Claimant） and*** Co., Ltd（Respondent）, Beijing Yingke Law Firm accepted theappointment of the Claimant, and designated us as the Claimant’s arbitration agents. After investigating carefully andparticipating in the oral hearing held in Beijing on 22 August 2018 by theArbitral Tribunal of CIETAC，we hold the view that thefacts are clear and the evidences are certain regarding the claimant’s claims, which should be supported by the Arbitral Tribunal. Basedon relevant facts, evidences and laws, we would like to express followingopinions:
1. The “Production Services Agreement” (“Agreement”) signed by the Claimant and theRespondent is valid.
Article15.2 of the Agreement (see Claimant'sEvidence 1) provided that this Agreement willbe construed and governed under Swiss laws. It is confirmed by Prof. Dr. ***,an experienced Swiss lawyer and law professor, in Section 6.1 and 6.2 of hisOpinion Letter (see Claimant's Evidence16) that (1) the Swiss law of contract is based on the principle offormal freedom according to Article 11 of Swiss Code of Obligations of 30 March1911 (the “Code”, see attachment); (2) thecontent of a contract may, within the limits of the law, be established atdiscretion of the parties pursuant to Article 19 of the Code. He has not beenprovided with any information that would lead him to conclude that the rightsof Claimant under the Agreement could be outside the limits of the law orunenforceable as contractually agreed by the Parties. Therefore his conclusionis that, under Swiss law, the Agreement is formally valid (see Section 1.2 ofthe Opinion Letter).
2. The Claimant and the Respondent havearrived at a consensus over the variation of the Agreement.
Claimant'sEvidence 2 shows that Mr. Y said in his email of 14 Oct. 2016 that he wouldnotify the financial department to deal with this transaction according to theadjusted version proposed by Ms. U of the Claimant in her email of 6 Oct. 2016.As Mr. Y could represent the Respondent due to his position as the contactperson of the Respondent (see Article 15.1 of the Agreement), his action couldbe interpreted as that the Respondent has agreed on the changes of theAgreement proposed by the Claimant. And Claimant's Evidence 3 directlyconfirmed that, according to real production services of the final AthletesFeatures, after proposal by Claimant，the total amount ofservices fees was finally changed from EUR *** to EUR ***. Thus, there is a “meeting of the minds” of both parties on thevariation of the Agreement.
3. The Claimant has already fulfilled itsobligation after alteration.
Asis indicated in Claimant’s Evidence 3, the Claimant hasproduced final Athletes Features according to the situation in Rio and hasdelivered the Features to the Respondent in Hard Drives, which have been usedby Respondent without any objection. Based on real production services of finalAthletes Features, Respondent confirmed that the total amount of service feesis finally EUR *** after the alteration agreed by both Parties, which meansthat the Claimant has already fulfilled its obligation of production servicescorresponding to total amount EUR *** of service fees. What’s more, RESPONDENT PRODUCTION PLAN 150716 attached to the email ofAugust 8, 2017 (see Claimant's Evidence 4) shows how the Claimant fulfilled its obligation in a detailedway.
4. The Respondent should pay the Claimantthe outstanding amount of EUR ***.
Accordingto Article 3.3 of the Agreement, all the fees shall be paid to the Claimant in3 installments if the Claimant has complied with its obligations and subject tothe details included in the APPENDIX C of the Agreement. Claimant's Evidence 3and 10 show that the Respondent confirmed it still owed the Claimant the secondand the third installment of fees totally amounting to EUR ***. Although theClaimant contacted the Respondent many times via email, face to face meeting,etc., in the attempt to get thesaid outstanding payment,the Claimant still has not received the payment from the Respondent up to now.Claimant’s Evidence 8 shows that the Claimant has providedsupporting documents and certificates for payment purposes provided by Article3.4 of the Agreement. So the Respondent should pay the Claimant of outstandingamount of EUR ***.
5. Interest claimed by the Claimant shouldbe supported.
Article3.6 of the Agreement provided that in the event of the late payment of anyinstallment of the Fees or any other payments due to Claimant under thisAgreement, interest will be levied at the rate of 3% per annum above Euribor(Euro Interbank Offered Rate) from time to time calculated on a daily basisfrom the due date until payment is received. According to Section 6.3 of theOpinion Letter of Prof. Dr. *** (see Claimant's Evidence 16), a contractuallate payment interest rate of 300 basis points above a determined EuroInterbank Offered Rate is not to be considered as excessive under generalprinciples. Therefore, as per Section 1.2 (iii) of the Opinion Letter of Prof.Dr. ***, the Claimant’s interest claim complies with theapplicable rules of the Swiss Code of Obligations.
Actualrate of interest per day on late payment is 0.0072%, with details ofcalculation of the interest rate mentioned in the Explanation for Interest onLate Payment (see Claimant’s Evidence 13).
Asis provided in Article 3.4 of the Agreement, separate invoices for eachinstallment of the Fees addressed to Respondent shall be paid in thirty days atthe latest. As is shown by Claimant'sEvidence 6 and 7, the Claimant sent the Respondent invoice No. 015-2016-1 amountingto EUR *** and invoice No. 040-2016-1 amounting to EUR ***. The Respondentreceived the two invoices respectively on 20 June 2016 and 16 November 2016.Therefore, Respondent should pay the Claimant *** Euros on 20 July 2016 and ***Euros on 16 December 2016. Since the Respondent did not effect payment on thedates respectively, the Respondent shall pay the Claimant interest on latepayment, which shall be levied at the rate of 0.0072% per day from 20 July 2016and 16 December 2016 until full payment is received by the Claimant, based onthe principal amount of *** Euros and *** Euros respectively.
6. TheRespondent shall pay the Claimant RMB *** tocompensate legal costs.
Consideringthat the Claimant has already fulfilled its obligation agreed by both Partiesand has asked the Respondent to pay outstanding service fees for several times,the Respondent’s refusal to pay left the claimant with no choice but toapply for arbitration to claim its rights. It’s fair tosay that this arbitration was completely caused by the Respondent’s default. Therefore, it would be fair and reasonable for theArbitral Tribunal to order the Respondent to compensate the Claimant’s legal cost RMB *** (see Claimant's Evidence 15). It would also befair and reasonable for the Arbitral Tribunal to order the Respondent tocompensate the Claimant’s paid arbitration fee of thiscase USD ***, according to the provisions of Article 52 of CIETAC ArbitrationRules.
7. Conclusion
Basedon the aforementioned statement, the Respondent has the obligation to pay theClaimant outstanding service fees EUR ***, interest on late payment, legal costRMB ***, and arbitration fees. We sincerely ask the Arbitral Tribunal tosupport Claimant’s claims.
Yours faithfully,
** Company
Arbitration agents: Wang Xuanjun, Luo Chunli
Attachment: Swiss Code of Obligations of 30 March 1911 (provisionsexpressly relied upon in the legal opinion of Prof. Dr.***)
【裁判结果】
经盈科王轩军律师和罗春利律师代理，本案的裁决结果如下：
·
法院裁定书结果
·
申请人的保全财产请求获得北京市第三中级人民法院的支持。该院裁定冻结被申请人的账户，案件申请费由被申请人负担。
二、 仲裁庭裁决书结果
申请人的仲裁请求全部获得中国国际经济贸易仲裁委员会仲裁庭的支持。
根据申请人与被申请人签订的《制作服务协议》、瑞士法律教授出具的《法律意见书》以及瑞士法的相关规定、申请人和被申请人签署的《备忘录》、被申请人出具的《确认函》以及邮件往来等其它证据，仲裁庭支持了申请人的全部仲裁请求。具体裁决如下：
1）The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant *** EUR as the balance of service fees;
2）The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant interest onlate payment of the principal amount of *** EUR at the rate of 0.0072% per day from July 20,2016until full payment of such amount is received by the Claimant and interest onlate payment of the principal amount of *** EUR at the rate of 0.0072% per day from December16,2016 until full payment of such amount is received by the Claimant;
3）The Respondent shall pay to the Claimant *** Yuan to compensate its legal costs; and
4）The arbitration fee of the present case is *** USD, all of which shall be borne by the Respondent.The above-mentioned arbitration fee offsets the deposit advanced by theClaimant, therefore the Respondent shall pay such amount to the Claimant.
5）The above payments shall be made and cleared by theRespondent to the Claimant within 15 days from the effective date of thisAward.
【典型意义】
1、在仲裁语言为英文的案件中，应注意语言表达要准确，避免歧义；
2、此案件的委托人为西班牙公司，涉及境外产生的法律文件应注意履行必要的公证认证手续；
3、双方当事人约定协议适用的实体法是瑞士法律，应采取合适的方法对外国法律进行查明；
4、本案涉及多个币种，如人民币、美元和欧元，应根据情况选择合适的币种和汇率；
5、本案涉及的负利率在国内比较少见，今后协议约定非直接利率应慎重。
【律师点评】
1、在国际仲裁案件中，对于事实查明，律师可能面临三大困难：第一，本方当事人有意或无意地对某些事实“避重就轻”；第二，本方当事人对于关键书面证据保存不完整或对关键事实不知情，从而无法有效证明相关事实问题；第三，对方当事人利用规则，掩盖了重要的、相关的信息，需要本方律师通过书面证据披露、事实证言的对质和庭审中的交叉盘问才能对一些被掩盖或歪曲的事实进行澄清和纠正。本案事实查明中涉及的困难主要包括：第一，委托人没有履约证据；第二，委托人没有明确的对方欠款证据；第三，对方不出庭无法通过对方澄清某些事实，需要本方证据过硬。盈科律师对本案进行了证据补强：第一，代理当事人直接与对方会谈并签订《备忘录》，对方确认欠款金额；第二，通过中间人与对方协商，由对方出具确认函，确认委托人履约，没有问题，并确认欠款。
2、律师对境外专家出具的法律意见应进行审查，发现问题及时与委托人沟通。本案双方当事人约定协议适用的实体法为瑞士法。关于瑞士法的查明，盈科律师要求委托人聘请瑞士法律专家就本案法律问题出具法律意见书。之后盈科律师对瑞士专家的法律意见书内容审核，发现其依据的瑞士债权法的英文版本与法律基本原则相悖。经盈科律师与瑞士专家多次交流沟通，最终瑞士专家重新出具了法律意见书，该意见书的意见得到了仲裁庭的采纳。
3、本案涉及西班牙语、英语、汉语等多种语言。本案的仲裁语言为英语，中国法院财产保全和执行的语言为汉语，此时需要将西班牙文文件翻译成英文和中文，英文文件翻译成中文。对于翻译公司的选择，仲裁庭没有特殊要求，而中国法院有特殊要求，需要有相关资质的翻译公司进行翻译，所以应选择法院指定的翻译公司翻译有关文件。
4、对于部分境外产生的文件，法院还要求办理公证、认证手续。本案中这些文件主要有：仲裁申请书、财产保全申请书、商业登记证书、法定代表人（负责人身份证明书）、授权委托书、强制执行申请书。作为代理律师，关键是尽可能提前了解并制作有关文件，减少当事人办理有关手续的次数，以减少当事人的时间成本和费用成本。
5、由于委托人为在西班牙注册的公司，不能直接支付人民币，在委托人支付有关费用（如律师费、仲裁费、法院保全费用、保险公司的担保费、翻译费等）之前，代理律师就委托人支付的币种和金额提出建议和要求时，应审慎考虑选择相关币种（美元或欧元）近期升值/贬值因素和适用的汇率(银行的买入价、卖出价或中间价），避免委托人利益受损。
6、协议中约定的欧元银行间拆放利率Euribor (EuroInterbank Offered Rate)为负利率，对于负利率的查明以及在起草合同时是否要以Euribor为基础作为逾期付款的利息，要慎重考虑。
7、本案中协议仲裁条款并不十分规范，代理律师经合理分析协议的仲裁条款，给委托人出具分析意见，指出可能认定仲裁协议有效的因素和无效的因素，最终提出倾向意见。同时，律师在向仲裁庭提交的文件中充分论证了仲裁条款的有效性，仲裁庭最终确认了仲裁条款的效力。在此建议，律师在起草仲裁协议（条款）时，应先查明有关机构的示范条款，从而拟定规范无病态的条款。
8、代理律师应考虑仲裁是否有前置程序，如有前置程序应履行完毕，并提供相应证据，否则影响仲裁案件的受理。本案中有仲裁前置程序，但没有证据证明委托人已经履行了前置程序，盈科律师在接受委托后，替委托人起草了有关通知，并要求委托人按协议约定履行了送达程序，保留了相关证据。
9、涉外仲裁案件中，仲裁员的选择也十分关键，应考虑多方面的因素，如国籍、专业水平、以往裁决的案例是否公正、是否有时间并愿意处理本案等等，必要时可以对仲裁员进行访谈。关于仲裁员的选择程序，首先应当按照协议约定选择，无约定的则按照选定的仲裁规则确定。在本案中，争议双方并未约定仲裁员的选择方式，而被申请人消极应对仲裁，很可能缺席审理，盈科律师遂代理申请人委托仲裁委主任指定仲裁员，这样比委托人直接指定仲裁员（单方指定的仲裁员会被仲裁委排除掉）更能维护委托人的利益。
10、对于整个案件来说，财产保全直接影响着案件的后续执行情况。申请财产保全时，要注意财产保全的文件手续与申请仲裁的文件分开，申请人提出保全的情况事前应对被申请人保密，避免被申请人转移财产。对于保全的后续事宜（如是否续保）也要持续关注并及时提醒委托人，并进行风险提示。经提示后由委托人选择，代理人根据委托代理合同约定进行代理。这既有利于委托人提前采取预防措施，也可以使律师相应免责。本案中涉及的财产保全风险主要是，被申请人可能没有财产可供保全，如仍要申请保全，委托人支付的保全费和担保费可能没有意义。
11、案件进入到执行阶段以后，代理律师应关注被申请人的财产状况，比如境内资产以及经营状况等。同时，应提示委托人可以根据《纽约公约》申请执行，如发现被申请人在《纽约公约》其他成员国有财产，也可向当地主管机关申请执行贸仲的裁决。
12、需要特别说明的是，仲裁案件应注意保密。为了保密需要，本案的很多信息已经作了脫密处理。
【律师简介】
王轩军，盈科律师事务所高级合伙人、北京大学法学学士、对外经济贸易大学工商管理硕士、中国政法大学法学博士研究生学历，高级国际商务师、对外经济贸易大学客座教授、Legal 500 推荐的WTO国际贸易律师、国际律师协会会员（公司与并购法律委员会委员）、中国贸促会/中国国际商会调解中心调解员、司法部建立的全国千名涉外律师人才库律师之一、法律出版社《中国涉外律师》编辑部向驻华商会、使馆、外向型机构推选的100位优秀涉外律师之一，具有30年从事律师和其他法律事务的丰富工作经验。专业领域：国际贸易、跨境投资、涉外仲裁诉讼等。
罗春利，盈科律师事务所高级合伙人、中国政法大学研究生学历，曾代理过众多有影响的重大民商案件。罗律师毕业后一直从事法律相关职业，拥有10余年的法律执业经验，为多家企事业单位担任常年法律顾问，深受客户的好评和赞誉。代理上千件诉讼和仲裁业务，为客户挽回巨额经济损失。遵循客户至上的原则，严格遵守客户保密制度，以专业的法律技能，严谨的执业道德，为各类客户提供优质高效的服务。擅长的业务有公司法务、合同法、房地产等。