Capability Statement to

The Republic of Indonesia

Friven Yeoh Steven L. Smith
fyeoh@omm.com ssmith@omm.com
+852-3512-2369/+65-6593-1800 +1-202-383-5298

Singapore: Washington, DC:

9 Raffles Place 1625 Eye Street, NW
#22-01/02 Washington, DC 20006
Republic Plaza 1
Singapore 048619
Joel Hogarth
David Foster jhogarth@omm.com
dfoster@omm.com +6221 2992 1987
+44 (20) 7558-4819
Jakarta*:
London: Tumbuan & Partners
Warwick Court Gandaria Tengah III/8
5 Paternoster Square Kebayoran Baru
London EC4M 7DX Jakarta Selatan 12130
England Indonesia

The Plaza Office Tower 41st Floor

Jl. M. H. Thamrin Kavling 28-30
Jakarta 10350
Indonesia
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... 1
OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... 3
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE......................................................................... 6
LEGAL TEAM .................................................................................................... 12
APPENDIX - LAWYER BIOGRAPHIES.......................................................... 16
Executive Summary
OMelveny & Myers LLP (OMelveny) is pleased to have the opportunity to present
our capability statement in relation to our investment arbitration experience to the
Government of the Republic of Indonesia (the Republic).

Our practice is most reputed for our ability to advocate for sovereigns and investors in
international arbitrations conducted under various institutional and ad hoc arbitration
rules including those of the ICSID, UNCITRAL, AAA, CIETAC, HKIAC, ICC,
JCAA, LCIA, SIAC and SCC.

We believe OMelveny is the firm of choice for arbitration matters because we have
the international presence, experience, and legal strategy necessary to provide world-
class representation with the utmost efficiency. As one of the first leading
international law firms in Asia, we have an intimate knowledge of the unique
investment, legal, and regulatory cultures of various Asian countries. We work with
our clients to offer a unique combination of local know-how and international law
firm excellence.

For ease of reference, the salient points of this capability statement are as follows:

1) Overview
One of the best international arbitration practices in the world.
Significant experience in the resolution of investor-state disputes.
Chair of OMelvenys international arbitration practice and Head of
OMelvenys Asian arbitration practice will act as co-leaders in an
arbitration representing the Republic, delivering effective representation
at substantial value.
2) Professional Experience
Experience in advising Asian states such as India in investment treaty
arbitrations.
Experience in representing sovereign-controlled enterprises in high-stake
disputes.
Experience with the workings of ICSID tribunals in high profile ICSID
arbitrations.
3) Co-Leaders of the OMelveny Team
Co-leader Steve Smith, Chair of OMelvenys international arbitration
practice, has handled a broad range of investor-state and sovereign

Page 1
 related disputes in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and
Europe.
Co-leader Friven Yeoh, Head of OMelvenys Asian arbitration practice,
has significant experience advising states and state-entities in Asia and has
helped clients navigate through sensitive political challenges.
We thank you again for considering our capabilities. It is our hope that the enclosed
materials are informative to you and help you in your deliberations. Please do not
hesitate to let partners Friven Yeoh or Steve Smith know if you have any questions
regarding the enclosed, or if there is additional information that you would like us to
provide.

Page 2
Overview
OMelveny is a premier international arbitration practice with significant
experience in the resolution of investor-state disputes. The OMelveny team
will be led by Steve Smith, Chair of the firms international arbitration
practice and Friven Yeoh, who heads the firms Asian arbitration practice
from Singapore, Jakarta and Hong Kong. The team is highly experienced in
the resolution of investor-state disputes in Asia.

Recognition As a Premier Arbitration Practice

OMelveny is recognized as having one of the best international arbitration practices

by leading law firm publications. Both our US and Asia offices have received year on
year praise for their expertise and focus in the discipline, for example:

Chambers Asia notes: This firms profile is synonymous with its high-quality work in
the international arbitration field.

Chambers USA notes: This firm is a recognized presence on the international

commercial arbitration scene, and has been involved in an increasing amount of
investor-state work.

Legal 500 Asia Pacific notes: The outstanding OMelveny & Myers LLP handles a
substantial amount of arbitration across Asia. The team provides fair and honest
advice based on its deep knowledge, expertise and the best business acumen.

AsiaLaw notes: Arbitration is a particular strength of OMelveny, with its seasoned

lawyers having appeared before many international arbitration tribunals as well as
the US and Hong Kong courts.

Global Arbitration Review has ranked OMelveny as one of the worlds leading
arbitration practices in its survey of the top specialist arbitration firms. The Firm has
been featured in the GAR 100 annually since its inaugural edition, and has been listed
in the GAR 30, an elite sub-set of the publications larger listing in both 2008 and
2009.

Experience, Strategy and Success in Resolving Investor-State Disputes

A significant portion of our recent work involves representing sovereigns and

investors in international investment disputes, including before ICSID. Our relevant
experience also includes the regular representation of parties in disputes involving
sovereign states and sovereign entities, with particular experience counseling state-
owned companies, giving us a considerable familiarity with the interplay between

Page 3
international and local law. Because of our longstanding experience and presence in
Asia, we are sensitive to the potential adverse effect on the foreign direct investment
climate resulting from claims brought against developing nations and their state-
owned entities. To defend against such claims, we work closely with our state and
state-owned entity clients to develop a holistic strategy that balances the legal
imperatives of the clients case with the wider political and economic considerations
of the dispute. Our history of success includes arbitration of scores of matters through
final award and ensuing enforcement proceedings, as well as favorable settlements
reached via mediation or assisted negotiations between the parties. As a result of this
significant experience, our proposed team is uniquely qualified to represent the
Republic in arbitration matters.

Market Leading Indonesia Practice

Besides having one of the most reputed international arbitration practices, OMelveny
has one of the strongest Indonesia teams in the market and recently entered into a
non-exclusive association with Tumbuan & Partners in Indonesia, providing clients
with access to an unmatched combination of quality Indonesian and international
legal advice. Headed by senior partner Fred G. Tumbuan and his daughter Jennifer B.
Tumbuan, Tumbuan & Partners is one of the most respected law firms in Indonesia.

OMelvenys Indonesian team has represented clients in a wide range of complex

cross-border disputes. They are supported by experienced dispute resolution
professionals based in Beijing, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo.
Members of our wider Asian Dispute Resolution Group have successfully resolved
disputes across the region and regularly work with local counsel to advise foreign
clients on effective dispute strategies in jurisdictions such as the Philippines,
Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand. Our team includes a number of highly experienced
Indonesia practitioners with decades of experience working on Indonesian matters,
including a number of fluent Bahasa Indonesia speakers. Furthermore, the team
includes Indonesian qualified lawyers, together with lawyers qualified in England,
New York, Hong Kong, and Australia who are familiar with Indonesian disputes.

Proposed Co-Leaders of the OMelveny Team

The team will be led by Singapore/Hong Kong partner Friven Yeoh and Washington,
DC partner Steve Smith. Both Friven and Steve are veteran dispute resolution
specialists with strong track records of success in international arbitration. As co-
leaders, Friven and Steve will maintain frequent and real-time contact with (1) the
Republic to ensure that its needs and demands are being met, that it is kept apprised of
material developments in the case, and that all the work is properly coordinated and
managed as well as (2) ICSID in Washington, DC to ensure that all administrative

Page 4
issues and legal submissions in relation to this arbitration can be handled
expeditiously.

Where necessary, OMelvenys UK dispute resolution practice led by David Foster

and OMelvenys Indonesian practice led by Joel Hogarth, will respectively provide
English law support and coverage on Indonesian issues to the team.

Page 5
Professional Experience
OMelveny has significant experience representing Asian and Latin American
states in investment treaty and international arbitrations and representing
sovereign-controlled enterprises in high-stake disputes. We are also familiar
with the workings of ICSID tribunals in high profile ICSID arbitrations and
can offer valuable insights in this regard.

Our experience with respect to investment disputes and other commercial disputes
involving sovereign states and/or sovereign-controlled entities is described below.

Representative Investment Dispute Experience

Government of India. In what was at the time one of the worlds largest ever
investment treaty arbitration disputes, Capital India Power Mauritius I & Energy
Enterprises (Mauritius) Company v. The Government of The Republic of India,
involving the construction of a US$6 billion combined-cycle power station in
Maharashtra, India, one of the firms partners successfully defended the Indian
Government against billion-dollar claims. The Mauritian subsidiaries of two US-
based companies brought claims valued at approximately US$1.6 billion against
the Government of India under a bilateral investment treaty between Mauritius
and India arising from the collapse of the Dabhol power station project. In an
inquiry covering events that spanned more than a decade, the dispute raised
complex issues of public international law, and required a detailed investigation of
engineering and technical issues concerning the design, construction, and
operation of the power station.

Major Northern European Energy Company. OMelveny represented

Northern Europes largest energy company in connection with a dispute over its
power plant investment in a Northeast Asian State. The dispute was against one
of the States largest state-owned enterprises and was referred to arbitration in
Singapore under the rules of the SIAC. We also advised the client in relation to
other methods of resolving the dispute, including through diplomatic channels and
the viability of a Bilateral Investment Treaty claim before ICSID. Resolution of
the dispute was earmarked by the government of our client as very important to
its bilateral ties with the State. The case also had strategic significance for our
clients future Asian investment strategies. OMelveny successfully negotiated a
highly favorable settlement for our client close to the amount claimed by the client
in the arbitration. Apart from successfully negotiating the settlement, we were
also responsible for conceiving a settlement structure that protects the clients
interests pending receipt of the full and final settlement amount. This involved,
among other things, navigating complex State currency control regulations.

Page 6
 Investor-Owned Utility. We represent a U.S. investor and the utility it controls
in a dispute with a Latin American state and its utility regulator arising from the
regulator's violation of local law in connection with the setting of below-cost
electricity rates, which, if implemented, will result in the financial ruin of the
utility and the destruction of our client's sizable investment. The matter is subject
to ICSID arbitration in Washington D.C. under the applicable BIT and will require
the resolution of claims for breach of the state's obligation to afford fair and
equitable treatment and for a creeping expropriation in violation of international
law.

Cargill, Incorporated. We represented Cargill in its initiation of a NAFTA

Chapter 11 arbitration, Cargill, Incorporated v. United Mexican States, against the
Government of Mexico under ICSIDs Additional Facility Rules. This arbitration
involved claims of expropriation and denial of national treatment, among others,
all arising from a discriminatory tax measure designed to promote Mexicos sugar
industry.

Multinational Professional Services Firm. One of the Firms Counsel advised

and represented a major multinational professional services firm on its investment
protection claims against a Sovereign State in Eastern Europe. The case involved
claims of expropriation and denial of justice under a Bilateral Investment Treaty.
The dispute arose of the State counterpartys decision to suspend our clients
license to practice in its territory. The case involved complex coordination of our
clients legal claims, diplomacy through the good offices of several diplomatic
officers, and a sustained public relations campaign. The case was settled in the
pre-litigation stage following the reinstatement of our clients entitlement to
practice in the territory.

ICSID Tribunal. One of the Firms Counsel assisted the Tribunal in an ICSID
arbitration involving claims brought by a British investor against an Asian State
arising out of an investment project pursuant to a Bilateral Investment Treaty.
The dispute involved an assessment of the Salini criteria as to the meaning of
investment under the ICSID Convention. The Tribunal eventually dismissed
the British investors claims on the ground that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction
over the dispute.

ICSID Ad-Hoc Annulment Committee. One of the Firms Counsel assisted the
ICSID ad-hoc annulment committee in an ICSID annulment proceedings between
a British corporation and the Republic of Seychelles relating to an ICSID
arbitration award under a loan agreement and sovereign guarantee. The
application for annulment of the award was dismissed.

Page 7
Representative Sovereign State and/or Sovereign-controlled Corporation Dispute
Experience

Latin American State. The Firm is currently representing a Latin American state
in an international arbitration arising out of the purchase of a naval vessel. The
dispute is subject to English law and involves analyzing the impact of certain
Presidential decrees upon the parties obligations.

Tongling Nonferrous Metals Group, Co. Ltd. We represented Tongling

Nonferrous Metals Group, Co. Ltd, a large Chinese state-owned conglomerate in a
SIAC arbitration arising out of a joint venture contract and an equipment supply
contract entered into between a listed company in which the conglomerate held a
controlling interest and foreign investors. The case was settled on highly
favorable terms for our client.

Chinese State-owned Company. We defended a PRC state-owned

company in an LCIA arbitration in London involving allegations of source
code theft and other IP claims stemming from a software development and
cooperation agreement.

Large PRC State-owned Conglomerate. We represented a large PRC state-

owned conglomerate (one of the fifteen largest commercial enterprises in the
PRC) in a HKIAC arbitration of a contractual dispute against a Taiwanese joint
venture partner. This high profile and politically sensitive dispute implicated vital
cross-strait relationships between the Mainland and Chinese Taipei.

Foreign-invested Power Company. We represented a foreign-invested power

company in an arbitration before a regional body arising out of the supply of
power to a state power company. We secured judicial enforcement of the award
against the state power company, supported by a court order freezing its bank
account until the award was paid.

Bechtel, Edison S.p.A. We represented Bechtel in a dispute with the Republic of

Ecuador over a 30-year water and sewage concession for a large municipality.
The dispute gave rise to litigation in the U.S., in which we succeeded in obtaining
a court order blocking Ecuador from drawing down on a letter of credit that served
as a performance bond under the parties concession contract. With the blocking
order in place, the project company initiated dispute resolution under the
concession contract, including mediation followed by ICC arbitration in Miami.
The matter settled with our clients sale of the concession to other foreign
investors.

Page 8
 Commodities Trader. We represented a privately held commodities trader in
three arbitrations in Stockholm against a foreign state-owned exporter of
commercial-grade uranium. These arbitrations centered on whether the trader had
an option to purchase an additional 40 tonnes of enriched uranium per year under
the parties main uranium supply contract for years 2006 through 2009, and
whether an adjustment to market prices is contractually available to the exporter
on the total quantity sold100 tonnes per year. After hearings in the first
arbitration in London and Stockholm, the tribunal issued a unanimous award
finding that the purchase option exists in our clients favor. In a related follow-on
arbitration, a tribunal based in Stockholm rejected the sellers attempt to secure a
market-indexed price increase on the 100 tonnes of enriched uranium for the
period 2006 through 2009 and awarded our client its costs of arbitration, including
its attorneys fees. Absent a victory in this final arbitration, our client would have
faced losses of nearly US$1 billion in meeting its supply obligations to customers
in Asia.

Duke Energy. This UNCITRAL arbitration in London arose when Sonatrach, the
Algerian state-owned energy company, stopped delivering liquefied natural gas
(LNG) to Duke Energy LNG under the parties long-term contracts. The parties
asserted numerous claims against one another, with Sonatrach seeking over
US$2.6 billion from Duke as a result of Dukes alleged breach of its obligation to
develop a US market for Sonatrachs LNG. Duke, in turn, sought US$60 million
as a result of Sonatrachs failure to meet its LNG shipping obligations and its
subsequent cessation of LNG sales. After nearly six years of arbitration and
several separate multi-week hearingsthree of which related to damages
alonethe tribunal issued a 94-page award that rejected Sonatrachs damages
claim and resulted in a large net recovery to Duke.

Major US Aerospace Company. This successful ICC arbitration involved a

dispute between a foreign state and our client, a major US aerospace company.
The foreign state sought damages and interest of approximately US$50 million on
claims for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment under the parties
military procurement contract. The hearing before the tribunal took place in two
separate sessions, in two different countries. The arbitral tribunal rendered a
unanimous award in our clients favor on all counts, including a substantial award
of attorneys fees and costs.

Chemical Overseas Holdings, Inc. and Dresdner Bank Lateinamerika AG.

We represented two international financial institutions, Chemical Overseas (a
subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase & Co.) and Dresdner Bank (a subsidiary of
Dresdner Bank AG), in Chemical Overseas Holdings, Inc. et al. v. Republics
Oriental del Uruguay, an international arbitration filed against the Republic of
Uruguay (RoU) under ICC rules. The dispute arose out of an investment in a

Page 9
 major private commercial bank in Uruguay in which the RoU was a shareholder.
After an extensive evidentiary hearing with more than 20 fact and expert
witnesses in New York, the tribunal rendered a unanimous award in favor of the
claimants for US$l00 million plus interest and attorneys fees. On March 23,
2005, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York confirmed the
award, and that judgment was affirmed on appeal.

State-Owned Oil Company. One of the Firms Counsel represented a state-

owned oil company in a dispute with a multinational energy company involving
the proper treatment of energy rights under various Production Sharing
Agreements. The dispute was subject to arbitration under the Arbitration Rules of
a South East Asian regional arbitration body. The value of the amount subject to
dispute exceeded US$1 billion and was settled on highly favorable terms.

German Manufacturer. The Firm represented a German company in an ICC

arbitration in Zurich, Switzerland against the Government of Iraq. The German
company had supplied machine tools to Iraq shortly before the First Gulf War.
The arbitration lasted more than two years and involved repeated procedural and
evidentiary hearings, as well as collateral negotiations in London, Brussels, Rome,
and Amman. The resulting arbitral awards in favor of the German company were
paid under letters of credit issued by an Italian bank in Atlanta, Georgia. When
the bank refused to honor the letters of credit, the German client brought suit in
the state courts of Georgia. The German client was ultimately successful in both
the arbitration and the US litigation, and collected all of its claims together with
prejudgment interest. The Zurich arbitration is believed to be the only successful
private arbitration against the Iraq Government under Saddam Hussein after the
First Gulf War.

Santa Fe International Corporation. The Firm represented Santa Fe

International Corporation, an oil industry construction and services firm, in
pressing claims against the government of Iran and the National Iranian Oil
Company before the Iran-US Claims Tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands. The
matter involved two separate arbitrationsone involving the governments
expropriation of oil drilling rigs and other equipment in the aftermath of the
Iranian revolution, the other for the revolutionary governments repudiation of the
prior governments contractual commitments. After extensive evidentiary
submissions, briefing of the legal issues under public international law and
numerous hearings before the tribunal, the Iranian parties initiated settlement
negotiations that led to a sizeable stipulated award in Santa Fe Internationals
favor.

Thomson-CSF. This ICC arbitration, Thomson-CSF v. Gould Inc., concerned a

series of disputes between our client Thomson-CSF, a French government-

Page 10
 controlled corporation in the business of military electronics, and Gould Inc., an
American company then in the defense business. Thomson is the principal
supplier of sophisticated battlefield radios for the US Army under a
US$4.3 billion Department of Defense procurement programthe largest-ever
Pentagon program based on non-American technology. In the arbitration, Gould
demanded a US$114 million equitable adjustment in its subcontract price based
on alleged design changes to the radio. In its First Interim Award, the tribunal
found that Gould had breached the subcontract by transferring it to a start-up
entity in violation of the agreements anti-assignment provision. Following a
subsequent evidentiary hearing before the arbitrators, the tribunal issued a Second
Interim Award, rejecting Goulds claim for US$114 million and finding that
Gould was not entitled to the equitable adjustment in the subcontract price. The
tribunals decisions paved the way for settlement negotiations that resulted in an
award by consent to Thomson of US$21 million.

US Military Contractor. We represented the US supplier of sophisticated

military radar systems in bringing claims against a foreign sovereign for breach of
the parties procurement contract. The arbitration, under the ICC rules, was
venued in Singapore and resulted in a confidential settlement between the parties
that facilitated their further commercial relations.

Mining Operator. We represented a mining operator in an LCIA Arbitration

with the Government of the Republic of Zambia. The dispute arose from the
privatization of Zambias emerald and diamond mines and the case centered on
interrelated issues of Zambian and public international law regarding the countrys
WTO and other international treaty obligations concerning foreign investments, as
well as the alleged expropriation of contractual and proprietary rights by the state.

International Financial Institutions. We represented two international financial

institutions in an ICC arbitration with the Republic of Uruguay (RoU). The
dispute arose out of an investment in a major private commercial bank in Uruguay
in which the RoU was a shareholder.

International Organization. One of the Firms Counsel represented an

international organization in an ICC arbitration in London concerning disputes
under an agreement with a consortium of companies in the aviation sector. The
case involved allegations of breach of contract and breach of EC Competition law.
The case involved a successful response to an application for interim and
conservatory measures under Article 23 of the ICC Rules. The case settled on
favorable terms following an evidentiary hearing.

Page 11
Legal Team
OMelvenys legal team will be co-led by Steven Smith (Chair of OMelvenys
international arbitration practice) and Friven Yeoh (Head of OMelvenys
Asia arbitration practice). The team is highly experienced in investment
arbitration disputes in Asia. Where necessary, OMelvenys UK dispute
resolution practice led by David Foster and OMelvenys Indonesian practice
led by Joel Hogarth, will respectively provide English law support and
coverage on Indonesian issues to the team.

To ensure seamless service on both sides of the Pacific, we propose having partner
Friven Yeoh, who works out of the Singapore, Jakarta and Hong Kong offices, and
partner Steve Smith, who splits his time between the Washington, DC and San
Francisco offices, serve as co-leaders on the arbitration matter. This arrangement has
received uniformly positive feedback from clients. As co-leaders, Friven and Steve
will maintain frequent and real-time contact with (1) the Republic to ensure that its
needs and demands are being met, that it is kept apprised of material developments in
the case, and that all the work is properly coordinated and managed as well as (2)
ICSID in Washington, DC to ensure that all administrative issues and legal
submissions in relation to this arbitration can be handled expeditiously. As the claims
are filed under the UK-Indonesia bilateral investment treaty, we anticipate the need
for English law support and coverage on Indonesian issues. To that end, David
Foster (Head of OMelvenys English dispute resolution practice in London) and Joel
Hogarth (Head of OMelvenys Indonesian practice in Jakarta), will also provide key
representation and advice on this matter. Their short biographies along with those of
other core team members are included below.

Steve SmithSteve, a partner in the Firms Washington, DC and San Francisco

offices, serves as Chair of the Firms International Arbitration practice. His practice
focuses on the arbitration and litigation of complex international disputes in a broad
range of different industries, many involving amounts in dispute well in excess of
USD $1 billion. In his 27 years of private practice, Steve has handled matters for and
against foreign states and their instrumentalities from Asia (including South Korea
and Indonesia), Africa (including Algeria and Mozambique), Latin America
(including Ecuador and Mexico), Europe (including France and Russia), and the
Middle East (including Kuwait and Iran). In addition to serving as counsel in
arbitrations administered by a variety of arbitral institutions throughout the world,
including ICSID, Steve also has served as an arbitrator in International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC) and UNCITRAL arbitrations. Leading law firm directories have
recommended Steve, including Chambers USA, which has referred to him as a truly
outstanding advocate whose written product and oral advocacy simply astound.

Page 12
Steve teaches the international arbitration course at Stanford Law School, where he is
a Lecturer in Law.

Friven YeohFriven, a partner in the Hong Kong and Singapore offices, is

experienced in the resolution of business and investment disputes and has advised
clients in connection with international arbitrations conducted under various
institutional and ad hoc arbitration rules including those of the ICC, ICSID, HKIAC,
CIETAC, SIAC, SCC and UNCITRAL. Frivens recent track record includes
defending a PRC-listed company in a US$100 million Hong Kong arbitration
conducted under the HKIAC Rules arising from a bet-the-company dispute in
connection with the set-up and management of a luxury shopping mall in Beijing.
Involving one of the highest profiled joint venture tie-ups between two leading
retailers from the PRC and Taiwan, the dispute attracted significant attention and took
on a political dimension implicating PRC-Taiwan cross straits relations. As such,
apart from legal representation in the arbitration proceedings, Friven also assisted the
client in navigating through sensitive political challenges before the Chinese Ministry
of Commerce and the Cross-straits Office of the Mainland. Friven also acted for a
large Chinese state-owned resources conglomerate in a US$50 million SIAC
arbitration in Singapore in respect of breaches under a joint venture contract and
equipment supply contract. His clients include Fortune 500 companies in the retail,
energy, telecommunications, mining and IT sectors. He has also advised various state
and investor parties in relation to rights and obligations under bilateral and
multilateral investment treaties, including under recently Concluded Agreement on
Investment of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-operation
between ASEAN and China. Chambers Global (2011) commends Friven for his
business-oriented approach and for providing good strategic advice to a mixture
of PRC clients and multinational corporations. He has been recognized as Tier 1
Leading Individual for Arbitration by Chambers Asia (2010 and 2011). Friven also
serves as an arbitrator in international arbitrations.

David FosterDavid is a partner in OMelvenys London office. He is one of the

founders of the Firms dispute resolution practice in London, which he now leads. His
practice focuses on complex and high value commercial arbitration and litigation
cases, usually involving a significant international element. Many of his cases have
required the management of proceedings in multiple jurisdictions. He has conducted
numerous international arbitrations under a variety of institutional rules (including
LCIA, ICC, WIPO, AAA) as well as the UNCITRAL and LMAA Rules. He also
represents clients in commercial litigation in the High Court and appellate courts of
England and Wales. David has particular experience handling disputes in the
technology, professional services and financial services sectors. He also has expertise
in investment treaty law and arbitration, having acted for the Indian Government in
two major treaty arbitrations, and advises clients on the structuring of investments to

Page 13
obtain the benefit of investment treaty protection as well as the conduct of treaty
arbitration claims. David has been regularly recognised as a leader in his field by
Chambers Global and Chambers UK. The 2011 edition of Chambers UK describes
him as an able, hard-working and effective practitioner who is very results-
oriented.

Joel HogarthJoel is the coordinator of the Firm's Indonesia practice and acts as
consultant to our associate firm in Jakarta, Tumbuan & Partners as well as
maintaining an office in Singapore. Joel focuses primarily on Mergers, Acquisitions,
Private Equity and Corporate Finance and also provides practice support for our other
practice areas on cross-border transactions involving Indonesia. Joel is an English and
New York qualified lawyer specializing in acquisitions and structured investments
into emerging markets. He has represented investment funds, financial institutions and
corporate groups on high profile Asian transactions since 2001, with a strong
grounding in special situations and distressed situations. He employs an extensive
knowledge of equity and debt investment techniques, including preference shares,
hybrid instruments, convertible debt, mezzanine and high-yield financing to
efficiently structure offshore investments into emerging markets.

James BarrattJames is a counsel in O'Melveny's London office. James focuses on

international arbitration and has represented clients in numerous arbitrations under all
leading arbitral rules (including ICC and LCIA) as well as in ad hoc arbitrations at
various seats (including London, Paris, Geneva, Vienna, Hong Kong and New York).
James' broad experience includes representing parties from both common and civil
law systems in disputes governed by a wide variety of substantive and procedural
laws (including English, New York, Spanish, French, German, Malaysian and PRC
law). James is an English qualified barrister with full rights of audience before all
English courts and has appeared as the sole or joint advocate before international
arbitral tribunals, in several trials and in a considerable number of applications. In
addition, James has represented and advised clients on investment treaty disputes,
public international law and in substantial commercial litigation concerning
competition law, banking and finance and fraud. James regularly advises on choice of
law and jurisdictional issues including the international enforcement of arbitration
awards and judgments. James has a particular focus on disputes concerning the
following sectors: joint ventures, M&A, investment banking, project finance,
insurance and reinsurance, aerospace and defence, pharmaceuticals, technological,
telecommunications, construction, energy, shipping and the airline industry. James
joined OMelveny from a leading international arbitration practice.

Ashley BellAshley, a counsel in O'Melvenys Singapore office, relocated from

Hong Kong in 2010 to further enhance the International Arbitration groups
capabilities in South East Asia. Ashley has over 9 years of experience acting for a
wide range of international institutions in connection with the resolution of

Page 14
commercial disputes across Asia and has represented clients in international
arbitrations conducted under various institutional and ad hoc rules, including those of
the ICSID, SIAC, ICC, HKIAC, UNCITRAL, LCIA and CIETAC. Ashleys regional
international arbitration and dispute resolution experience includes representing a
Thai steel mill operator in an ICC arbitration concerning the alleged failure of a
consulting firm to adequately supervise the commissioning of the steel mill; and
acting for an international bank in CIETAC arbitration proceedings concerning a
dispute with contractors over the delayed construction of a showroom and convention
development in Shanghai. Ashley regularly coordinates cross-border litigation
strategies for multi-national clients, advising on proceedings around the region,
including in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.

Desmond AngDesmond is a counsel in O'Melveny's Hong Kong office, a

Registered Foreign Lawyer in OMelvenys Singapore office and a member of
the Business Trial and Litigation International Practice Group. Desmond has advised
foreign investors in Asia in relation to their rights under bilateral and multilateral
investment treaties, including under the recently concluded Agreement on Investment
of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-operation between
ASEAN and China. Desmond has represented clients, including state-owned entities,
in proceedings conducted under the ICC, HKIAC, CIETAC, SIAC, SCC and
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and has also assisted arbitral tribunals in ICSID
arbitrations. He also has experience in litigation ancillary to international arbitrations,
including enforcement and Mareva proceedings before the Singapore High Court. He
also has experience representing defendants in high profile white-collar criminal
investigations including representing the CEO of a Singapore subsidiary of a Chinese
state-owned entity and a former politician in Singapore.

Ratih (Ipop) Nawangsari is a counsel in OMelvenys Jakarta office and a

member of the Transactions Department. Ipop specializes in oil and gas/natural
resources, general corporate, finance and projects work in Indonesia. She also has
broad experience in assignments relating to foreign investments, financing, mergers
and acquisitions, the power sector, natural resources and capital market in Indonesia.
Prior to joining the firm, she was a foreign legal consultant with Latham & Watkins
LLP in Singapore, and before that a senior associate with Hadiputranto, Hadinoto &
Partners, one of the major Indonesian law firms in Jakarta. Ipop is admitted to practice
in Indonesia. She has been in practice since 1996, during which she has advised
clients from various industries in numerous types of multinational transactions.

Full-length biographies of our core team members are included in the Appendix.
Where necessary and appropriate, we will deploy other resources from our firm to
ensure we achieve a cost-effective legal representation.

Page 15
Appendix - Attorney Biographies

Page 16
 Steven L. Smith
Partner | ssmith@omm.com

Steve Smith is a partner in OMelvenys Washington, DC and

San Francisco offices and Chair of the Firms International
Arbitration practice. His practice focuses on the arbitration and
litigation of complex international commercial and intellectual
property disputes in a broad range of different industries, many
involving amounts in dispute in the billions of dollars. In his 27
years of private practice, Steve has handled matters for and
Resident Office(s) against foreign states and their instrumentalities from the Middle
East, Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa. In addition to
Washington, DC: serving as counsel in arbitrations administered by a variety of
1625 Eye Street, NW arbitral institutions throughout the world, he also has served as an
Washington, DC
20006 arbitrator in International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and
Telephone UNCITRAL arbitrations.
+1-202-383-5298
Facsimile Recognized in many notable lawyer directories, Steve is highly
+1-202-383-5414 recommended nationally by Chambers and Partners USA 2007 as
a truly outstanding advocate whose written product and oral
San Francisco: advocacy simply astound. Chambers and Partners USA 2008
Two Embarcadero commended Steve for his superior written work, which,
Center, 28th Floor according to one high-profile client, is the best Ive ever
San Francisco, CA
94111
seen. He is also a masterful advocate who can put together a
mesmerizing argument. For the past years, he has been among
Telephone a handful of lawyers in San Francisco who were recommended
+1-415-984-8875 in the Global Counsel Handbook on Dispute Resolution: The Law
Facsimile and Leading Lawyers Worldwide.
+1-415-984-8701

Steve is one of the few advocates identified as a leading counsel

for arbitration by Whos Who Legal California, which
characterized Steve as an outstanding counsel, (2008), and as a
first-class advocate (2009). Steve was also recognized as a
leader in international arbitration in the 2009 International Whos
Who of Business Lawyers.
Steve is the recipient of the 2008 California Lawyer of the Year
(CLAY) Award for his extraordinary achievement in Alternative
Dispute Resolution.

Steve is a Lecturer in Law at Stanford Law School where he

teaches international commercial arbitration.

Steve holds a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania, graduate

degrees in history and law from Cambridge University and a J.D.
from the University of California at Berkeley, where he was

Page 17
founding editor-in-chief of the schools international law journal.

Illustrative Professional Experience

International Arbitration

Lead counsel for Cargill in its initiation of NAFTA

Chapter 11 arbitration against Mexico under ICSIDs
Additional Facility Rules. Cargill sought substantial
damages on claims of expropriation and denial of national
treatment, among others, all arising from a discriminatory
tax measure designed to promote Mexicos sugar industry.
Co-lead counsel for Lockheed Martin Corporation in its
successful defense of an ICC arbitration brought by the
Republic of Korea to recover approximately US$50
million for alleged breach of contract, fraud, and unjust
enrichment in connection with a contract to supply
military aircraft. The Tribunal cleared Lockheed Martin
of any wrongdoing and awarded it a substantial portion of
its attorneys fees and costs.
Lead counsel for a U.S. investor and the utility it controls
in a dispute with a Latin American state and its utility
regulator arising from the regulator's violation of local law
in connection with the setting of below-cost electricity
rates, which, if implemented, will result in the financial
ruin of the utility and the destruction of our client's sizable
investment. The matter is subject to ICSID arbitration in
Washington D.C. under the applicable BIT and will
require the resolution of claims for breach of the state's
obligation to afford fair and equitable treatment and for a
creeping expropriation in violation of international law.
Lead counsel for Duke Energy Corporation in a major
UNCITRAL arbitration in London that arose when
Sonatrach, the Algerian state-owned energy company,
stopped delivering liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Duke
under their long-term contracts. The parties asserted
numerous claims against one another, with Sonatrach
sought US$2.65 billion in damages as a result of Dukes
alleged breach of its obligation to develop a US market for
Sonatrachs LNG, while Duke sought US$27 million as a
result of Sonatrachs failure to meet its LNG shipping
obligations. After nearly six years of arbitration and
several separate multi-week hearings, the tribunal issued
an award rejecting Sonatrachs damages claim and
granting a large recovery to Duke.

Page 18
 Counsel for US commodities trader in three ad hoc
arbitrations in Stockholm and London against a Russian
state-owned entity involving a series of claims under a
uranium-supply contract. Our client prevailed on all
claims in the three arbitrations, establishing its entitlement
to purchase optional quantities of enriched uranium at
contract prices well below the market prices demanded by
the seller, thereby eliminating a US$1 billion exposure.
Counsel for a French manufacturer in a major ICC
arbitration, Thomson-CSF v. Gould Inc., involving various
disputes with an American subcontractor on a US$4.5
billion military procurement program, including the
subcontractors claim for a US$114 million equitable
adjustment in the fixed contract price. Thomson-CSF
defeated that claim and obtained a US$21 million award
in its favor.
Counsel for a major oil industry construction and services
firm in two separate arbitrations before the U.S.-Iran
Claims Tribunal under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules
against the Government of Iran and the National Iranian
Oil Company for expropriation of property and breach of
state contract. The arbitrations concluded with a large
stipulated award in our clients favor.
Lead Counsel for major US food/beverage company in
dispute over licensors purported termination of the
clients multi-billion dollar Yoplait yogurt business in the
U.S. The dispute is governed by French law and subject to
ICC arbitration in New York.
Lead counsel for Bechtel International, Inc. and
affiliates in pending ICC arbitration initiated by a
Brazilian power company to recover up to US$250
million in damages resulting from the failure of the steam
turbine generator in a power plant designed and built by
the Bechtel entities.
Lead counsel for US-investor controlled Mexican trust in
ICC arbitration involving a dispute between joint venture
partners that derailed their US$250 million resort
development project in Mexico. The liability phase of the
arbitration concluded with an award in our clients favor,
and the ensuing damages phase culminated in an
evidentiary hearing in New York. In Spring 2007, the
parties entered into a confidential settlement agreement
that allowed our client to take the project forward alone.
Lead counsel for US pharmaceutical company in pending
arbitration in Zurich, Switzerland, under the rules of

Page 19
 German Institute of Arbitration (DIS), in which a German
company is seeking to terminate a drug development and
license agreement between the parties.
Lead counsel for US chemical company in ICC arbitration
in which the Mexican partner sought indemnification for
JVs exposure to criminal and civil antitrust liability in
North America and Europe resulting from our clients
sales activities on behalf of the JV. After extensive
briefing and a hearing on our clients application for
summary disposition, the Tribunal issued a partial award
dismissing all but two of the Claimants fifteen claims,
including those seeking nearly all of Claimants
damages. The case quickly settled without any payment
from our client.
Lead counsel for Mitsubishi Corporation in an ICC
arbitration in Los Angeles, California arising from the
parties license and distribution agreements. After
extensive evidentiary hearings, the Tribunal issued a Final
Award in Mitsubishis favor, dismissing claimants trade
secret and related claims seeking approximately US$40
million in damages, and awarding Mitsubishi a broad
injunction and over US$8 million in damages, attorneys
fees and costs on Mitsubishis counterclaims for copyright
infringement and breach of contract.
Lead counsel for Occidental Petroleum Corporation and
an affiliated company in an arbitration in London under
the Rules of the International Center for Dispute
Resolution concerning disputes arising from the affiliates
sale of assets in Nigeria. After an evidentiary hearing in
Madrid, Spain, the Tribunal issued an award in Oxys
favor dismissing all of the claimants claims.
Lead counsel for HBO Asia in an ICC arbitration against
its Taiwanese distributor involving contractual disputes
and damages of more than US$26 million, as well as
separate judicial and regulatory proceedings in
Taiwan. After HBO Asia obtained an expedited Partial
Award determining that it had lawfully terminated the
parties distribution agreement, the arbitration and related
proceedings settled favorably for our client.
Lead counsel for a Japanese manufacturer in Zimmern v.
Mitsui Seiki Kogyo Co. Ltd., an ICC arbitration in Paris,
France in which Mitsui Seiki defeated trade secret claims
seeking US$10 million in damages and an injunction that
would have closed one of the companys main businesses.
Lead counsel for a Japanese corporation in J. D. Lincoln,

Page 20
 Inc. v. Nippon Steel Chemical Co., Ltd., an arbitration
under the International Rules of the American Arbitration
Association concerning an US$18 million claim for
breach of a contract to supply manufactured items to the
Japanese market. The matter settled favorably prior to the
hearing.
Lead counsel for a Japanese chemical company in federal
court litigation and related arbitration before the Japan
Commercial Arbitration Association in Osaka, concerning
a patent-license dispute with a U.S. company. The
Japanese company was ultimately successful in enforcing
its patent rights, obtaining both a court enforced consent
decree against future use of the patented technology and
the payment of substantial back royalties.
Counsel for US mining equipment manufacturer in ICC
arbitration in which the Australian Respondent asserted
antitrust counterclaims seeking nearly US$2 billion in
damages. Our client defeated those counterclaims in their
entirety and received an award of costs and attorneys fees
of approximately US$8 million.
Lead counsel for an English computer company in ICC
arbitration involving a dispute under a contract for the
development of network computers.
Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration involving a US
companys termination of its Chinese distributor.
Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration involving a complex
dispute between joint venture partners over the financing
and development of their US business.
Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration between Italian and US
surfing apparel companies arising from the collapse of
their American-joint venture.
Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration between US and
Canadian companies concerning a dispute under their
exclusive distribution and marketing agreement for a
dietary supplement.
Sole arbitrator in ICC arbitration between Japanese and
American biotechnology companies concerning a dispute
under a license agreement.
Sole arbitrator in UNCITRAL arbitration of patent license
dispute between a California company and a Japanese-
American joint venture.
Party-appointed arbitrator on three-member panel in ICC
arbitration involving dispute under agreement to
commercialize biotechnology patents relating to a method
to optically read the human genome.

Page 21
 Chair of three-member tribunal in ICC arbitration
involving termination of distribution agreement between
US medical device manufacturer and Greek distributor.

International Litigation

Lead counsel for Bechtel, Edison S.p.A. and their

affiliated project company in a dispute with the Republic
of Ecuador over its creeping expropriation of a 30-year
water and sewage concession for a large
municipality. The dispute gave rise to litigation in the
United States, in which we succeeded in obtaining a court
order blocking Ecuador from drawing down on a letter of
credit that served as a performance bond under the parties
concession contract. With the blocking order in place, the
project company initiated dispute resolution under the
concession contract, including mediation followed by ICC
arbitration in Miami.
Counsel for the Kuwaiti Government in Computer
Firmware Systems, Inc. v. The State of Kuwait, a case in
which Kuwait defeated investor claims arising from an
alleged program to diversify the countrys economy by
establishing a computer industry there.
Co-lead counsel for Duke Energy Corporation in federal
court litigation in Houston, Texas against Citrus Trading
Corp. over Dukes termination of the parties long-term
contract for the purchase by Citrus of Algerian
LNG. Duke terminated the parties contract for Citrus
alleged breach, and Citrus counterclaimed for damages of
approximately US$200 million on the ground that the
termination was allegedly unlawful. The case settled for a
fraction of the amount Citrus had sought.
Lead counsel for Dainippon Screen Manufacturing
Company and affiliates in patent infringement litigation
against Scitex Corporation, an Israeli Company, involving
six patents concerning three different technologies in the
graphic arts and digital publishing fields. The case, which
was approaching trial in federal court, was submitted to
mediation/arbitration before the WIPO International
Arbitration Center in Geneva, Switzerland. (It was the
Centers first matter). The mediation/arbitration led to a
settlement favorable to Dainippon Screen.
Lead counsel for Taiwanese bicycle components
manufacturer in its successful defense against claims for
patent, trademark, and trade dress infringement.

Page 22
 Co-lead counsel for the Royal Automobile Club in
London and related English companies and their directors
in the successful defense of a class action lawsuit in Los
Angeles superior court seeking US$90 million in damages
on claims arising from the 450 million sale of a related
motoring services company.
Lead counsel in successful defense of the US subsidiary of
a Korean conglomerate in a federal court action brought
by a Malaysian company for breach of contract.
Counsel for 10 motion picture studios and their trade
association in antitrust action brought by would-be
American dual-deck VCR manufacturer against Japanese
and Korean electronics industries and US motion picture
industry. Go-Video v. Motion Picture Association of
America, et al.
Counsel for defendant oil company in Clayco Petroleum
Corp. v. Occidental Petroleum Corp. et al., (9th Cir.
1983), cert. denied 464 US 1040 (1984), a case
establishing that there is no Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
exception to the Act of State doctrine.

Regulatory Proceedings

Lead counsel for NEC Corporation in ITC proceeding

brought by Rambus seeking an order excluding, among
other things, certain SDRAMs and microprocessors from
entering the United States.
Counsel for Intervenor Advanced Micro Devices in ITC
proceeding in which Intel sought an order to exclude
Taiwanese computers using AMD microprocessors from
entering the United States on the ground that they
infringed an Intel patent. The ITC terminated the
proceeding against Intel with a ruling in AMDs favor.
Counsel for IBM in ITC proceeding based on allegations
that certain IBM disk drives infringed patents owned by
Conner Peripherals. The matter successfully settled as
part of a global settlement

Education

University of California at Berkeley, J.D., 1983

Cambridge University, England, L.L.B., 1981 (L.L.M., 1986)
with honors
Cambridge University, England, M. Phil., History of
International Relations, 1979

Page 23
University of Pennsylvania, B.A., History, 1978: cum laude

Professional Activities

Lecturer in Law, Stanford Law School (2010-)

Admitted, California; District of Columbia
Chair, California State Bar, International Law Section (1999
2000)
Chair, ICCs Arbitration Committee for the Northwest US (2002
present)
Vice-Chair, International Arbitration Committee of the ABAs
Section of International Law and Practice (2001 2004; 2006
present)
President, Northern California International Arbitration Club
(2005 2007)
Member, ICC Commission on Arbitration (2006 present)
Honorary Member, Commercial Bar Association of London
(COMBAR) (2004 present)
Co-Chair, 2003 Annual Meeting of the ABAs Section of
International Law and Practice; 2000 International Law Weekend,
on International Arbitration in Asia: Drafting Effective
Provisions, Managing the Process, and Enforcing Awards; 1999
International Law Weekend, which focused on Lessons From
The Asian Financial Crisis: Managing The Legal Fallout and
Anticipating Future Crises (San Francisco, California, June
1999); 1997 International Law Weekend, which focused on
information technology law in the Asia-Pacific Region (San
Francisco, California, August 1997)
Founding Editor-in-Chief, International Tax & Business Lawyer
(renamed Berkeley Journal of International Law) (1983)
Member, Board of Overseers, Berkeley Journal of International
Law (2003 present)
Author, Arbitration of International Disputes, 1 Alternative
Dispute Resolution Practitioners Guide, Ch. 19 (2011);
International Commercial Dispute Resolution, 44 Intl Lawyer
113 (Spring 2010); International Commercial Dispute
Resolution, 43 Intl Lawyer 443 (Summer 2009); International
Commercial Dispute Resolution, 42 Intl Lawyer 383 (Summer
2008); Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards, a chapter
in the treatise entitled Practitioners Guide to International
Arbitration and Mediation; International Commercial
Arbitration in Japan, a chapter in the Practitioners Guide to
International Arbitration and Mediation; Advocacy and Tactics
in International Commercial Arbitration, 5 California
International Practitioner 64 (1995); Badger Revisited:

Page 24
Implications for the Implementation of the Transfer of
Technology Code, 1 Intl. Tax & Bus. Law. 117 (1983);
Numerous papers for various programs and conferences
Lecturer, Lectured in courses on international dispute resolution
and international business at numerous law and business schools,
including Stanford, Berkeley and U.C.L.A
Speaker, Speaks frequently on international dispute resolution
issues at conferences all over the world, including: ICC Asia -
Pacific Conference (Hong Kong, April 2011); ICC Asia - Pacific
Conference (San Francisco, March 2010); Keynote Speaker at
ABA Section of Dispute Resolutions 4th Annual Arbitration
Training Institute (San Francisco, California, February 2009);
ICC Arbitration Workshop (San Francisco, California, June
2007); Arbitrating the Mega Case (Los Angeles, California,
March 2007); 2003 Conference on ICC International Dispute
Resolution, Insights into Practice and Procedure (Scottsdale,
Arizona, February 2003); 17th Annual Joint Symposium of
School of International Arbitration and ICC Institute of World
Business Law on Control and Expedition of Procedure by
Arbitrators (London, England, March 2002); 1998 International
Law Weekend on International Arbitration Of Intellectual
Property Disputes Under The New ICC Rules (San Francisco,
California, July 1998); South Korean Ministry of Justice and
Korea Private International Law Association Conference on
Recent Developments in International Litigation (Seoul, South
Korea, November 1996); Japanese Institute of International
Business Law (Kokusai Shoji-Ho Kenkyusho), Conference on
Representing Japanese Companies in Litigation and Arbitration
in the United States (Tokyo, Japan, January 1996)

Page 25
 Friven Yeoh
Partner | fyeoh@omm.com

Friven Yeoh is a partner in OMelvenys Hong Kong office, a

Registered Foreign Lawyer in OMelvenys Singapore office and
a member of the Business Trial and Litigation Practice.

Frivens practice involves both adversarial and transactional

work. In his adversarial practice, Friven has experience in the
resolution of Chinese-foreign business disputes and has
Resident Office(s) represented clients in international arbitrations conducted under
Singapore: various institutional and ad hoc arbitration rules including those
9 Raffles Place of the ICC, ICSID, HKIAC, CIETAC, SIAC, SCC and
#22-01/02 UNCITRAL. He has also represented clients in a variety of
Republic Plaza 1
Singapore 048619 commercial litigation and regulatory investigations involving
Telephone product risk and liability, energy, corporate affairs and financial
+65-6593-1800 services matters. Friven also serves as an arbitrator in
Facsimile international arbitration.
+65-6593-1801
Illustrative Professional Experience
Jakarta*:
Tumbuan & Partners Friven's adversarial experience includes:
Gandaria Tengah III/8
Kebayoran Baru Advising a multinational consulting firm in an ICC
Jakarta Selatan 12130
Indonesia arbitration seated in Zurich involving a multi-million
claim against a leading European conglomerate in
The Plaza Office connection with the design and construction of a high-
Tower 41st Floor speed rail link in China.
Jl. M. H. Thamrin Advising a major South East Asian energy conglomerate
Kavling 28-30
Jakarta 10350 in an investor-state dispute under ICSID Rules over the
Indonesia breach of investor-protection obligations under the
Agreement on Investment of the Framework Agreement on
Comprehensive Economic Co-operation between ASEAN
Hong Kong:
31st Floor, AIA and China.
Central Advising on a London-seated ICC arbitration for an
1 Connaught Road Indonesian multimedia listed company in connection with
Central a shareholders dispute.
Hong Kong Advising on an ICC arbitration in Hong Kong for the
S.A.R.
shareholders of a telecommunications conglomerate in a
Telephone US$50m dispute arising from the sale and purchase of
+852 3512-2369 shares to a major European company.
Facsimile Defending a PRC listed company in a US$100m Hong

Page 26
+852-2522-1760 Kong arbitration conducted under the HKIAC Rules
arising from a joint-venture dispute in connection with the
set-up and management of a luxury shopping mall in
Beijing.
Advising a multinational energy company in a US$500m
claim in a Stockholm arbitration conducted under SCC
rules, arising from the breach of a petroleum exploration
and production contract.
Advising a multinational computer manufacturer in the
defence of a US$70m claim in Hong Kong under the
UNCITRAL arbitration rules arising from a software
manufacturing and services agreement.
Advising a major information technology company in a
CIETAC claim against a joint venture partner of several
service centers in China.
Defending a U.S. leisure goods conglomerate in an SIAC
arbitration against allegations of breach of a worldwide
exclusive distribution agreement.
Pursuing a US$80m claim on behalf of a major European
energy company against a significant Chinese state owned
company in an ad hoc arbitration in Singapore in respect
of breaches under a share transfer arrangement.
Advising a Japanese consumer product company in a
multi-million dollar Hong Kong arbitration in respect of
misrepresentation and breach of warranty arising from a
stock purchase agreement.
Advising several major European and Japanese financial
institutions in relation to investigations carried out by the
UK Financial Services Authority and the Hong Kong
Securities and Futures Commission.
Advising a major European multinational company in
relation to its crisis management strategy arising from the
arrest and criminal prosecution by Chinese authorities of
several senior executives of its PRC operations for alleged
tax evasion and theft of trade secrets.
Advising a major consumer products manufacturer in
defending product liability claims in several EU states and
in Asia, and formulating a global defence strategy.

In his transactional practice, Friven is involved in advising clients

on China-related mergers and acquisitions, direct investments,
regulatory compliance, antitrust, and corporate governance issues

Page 27
including:

Advising a major European retailer in setting up retail

operations in the greater China region.
Advising a U.S. energy company in the negotiations of
nuclear fuel supply and technology transfer arrangements.
Advising a U.S. multinational on an aluminum fabrication
joint venture.
Advising a U.S. printing and media company in the
acquisition of printing operations in Hong Kong and the
PRC.
Assisted a European multinational company in the review
of its global compliance strategy.

Education

London School of Economics, LL.M., 2001

University of Melbourne, B. Com, LL.B., 1996

Professional Activities

Admitted, Hong Kong; England and Wales; Victoria, Australia

Member, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, LCIA Young
International Arbitration Group, China Arbitration Forum, Hong
Kong Law Society, Law Society of England and Wales, Law
Institute of Victoria
Recognition, named as a Key Individual in Chambers Global
2009/2010/2011/2012, and Chambers Asia 2009/2010/2011/2012
for 'Asia-Pacific: International Arbitration' and 'Hong Kong:
Dispute Resolution: International Arbitration'; recommended in
Asia Pacific Legal 500 2008/2009/2010/2011/2012 for 'Dispute
Resolution: Hong Kong'
Author, Enforcement of Dispute Outcomes in China in
Duelling with Dragons: Managing Business Disputes in Todays
China (Kluwer Law, 2007); Chapter 12 - Recognition and
Enforcements of Awards, The Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance
Commentary and Annotations (Sweet & Maxwell, 2011)
Co-Author, Choosing an Arbitral Institution in Cross-border
Commercial Arbitration, PLC Cross-border Dispute Resolution
Handbook 2006/07; Hong Kong and Mainland China Proposal
on Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments: An Alternative Means
of Resolving Sino-foreign Business Disputes? Mealeys

Page 28
International Arbitration Report, Vol. 21, No. 6 (June 2006);
New Supreme Peoples Court Interpretation on Mainland
Chinas Arbitration Law, Mealeys International Arbitration
Report, Vol. 21, No. 9 (September 2006); China: Development
and Trends, Asia-Pacific Arbitration Review 2007; "The
People's Courts and Arbitration - A Snapshot of Recent Judicial
Attitudes on Arbitrability and Enforcement," Journal of
International Arbitration, Vol. 24, No. 6 (December 2007);
Recognition and Enforcement of Awards under the New York
Convention - The China and Hong Kong Perspectives, Journal
of International Arbitration, Vol. 25, No. 6 (December 2008);
Country chapter (China) for PLC Dispute Resolution Handbook
2010/2011; Reflections on Gao Haiyan - of Arb-Med,
Waivers, and Cultural Contextualisation of Public Policy
Arguments, Journal of International Arbitration, Vol. 29, No. 3
(2012)
Speaker, Dispute Avoidance and Resolution Conference, Beijing,
29 August 2006; Managing Business Disputes in China Today,
Tokyo, 14 November 2006, Shanghai, 15 March 2007 and Silicon
Valley, 28 March 2007; Juris Conference on Doing Business in
China, Stockholm, 18 April 2008, New York, 11 May 2009 and
20 September 2011; Whats Next for China Conference,
Singapore, 12 November 2008; ICC Conference on Arbitrating
and Mediating Banking & Finance Disputes, Hong Kong, 29 June
2010; Conference on Resolving Business Disputes in Todays
China: A Case Study, Stockholm, 8 November 2010;
Conference on Doing Business and Arbitrating Disputes in
South East Asia, Tokyo, 8 December 2010; ICC Asia-Pacific
Conference on International Arbitration Trends in the Asia-
Pacific Region, San Francisco, 8 March 2012
Appointment, Assistant Editor, Journal of International
Arbitration
Languages, English, Cantonese, Mandarin Chinese

Page 29
 David Foster
Partner | dfoster@omm.com

David Foster is a partner in OMelvenys London office. He is

one of the founders of the Firms dispute resolution practice in
London, which he now leads. His practice focuses on complex
and high value commercial arbitration and litigation cases, usually
involving a significant international element. Many of his cases
have required the management of proceedings in multiple
jurisdictions. He has conducted numerous international
Resident Office(s) arbitrations under a variety of institutional rules (including LCIA,
London: ICC, WIPO, AAA) as well as the UNCITRAL and LMAA
Warwick Court Rules. He also represents clients in commercial litigation in the
5 Paternoster Square High Court and appellate courts of England and Wales.
London EC4M 7DX
England
David has particular experience handling disputes in the
Telephone technology, professional services and financial services
+44 (20) 7558-4819 sectors. He also has expertise in investment treaty law and
Facsimile arbitration, having acted for the Indian Government in two major
+44-20-7088-0001 treaty arbitrations, and advises clients on the structuring of
investments to obtain the benefit of investment treaty protection as
well as the conduct of treaty arbitration claims.

David has been regularly recognised as a leader in his field

by Chambers Global and Chambers UK. The 2011 edition of
Chambers UK describes him as an able, hard-working and
effective practitioner who is very results-oriented.

Illustrative Professional Experience

International Arbitration

Defending the Government of India in the US$1.6 billion

investment treaty arbitration (under the India-Mauritius
bilateral investment treaty) commenced by GE and Bechtel
as a result of the Dabhol power station project. This was
one of the highest profile investment treaty disputes in the
world at the time, and involved allegations against the
Indian Government that it had breached international law
by expropriating investors interests in the power project.
The arbitration was seated in London and conducted under
the UNCITRAL Rules.

Page 30
 Acting for the Government of India in a related investment
treaty arbitration with a value of more than US$4.5 billion
brought in relation to Enrons 80% interest in the Dabhol
power station project under the India-Netherlands bilateral
investment treaty.
Acting for one of the worlds largest online gaming
software companies in a series of consolidated WIPO
arbitrations seated in London, conducted under the WIPO
Expedited Arbitration Rules. The case, which is governed
by the substantive laws of the Isle of Man, involves
numerous claims and counterclaims, and is ongoing.
Acting for Moscow Oil Refinery in a US$300 million
LCIA arbitration in London. The arbitration was conducted
on a fast-track timetable that required an award to be
rendered within 3 months of the tribunal being appointed.
The dispute arose as a result of a turnkey contract for the
design and construction of a polypropylene processing
facility in Russia. Moscow Oil Refinery succeeded in
defending the claim on liability, and then successfully
defeated an attempt to challenge the award in the English
Commercial Court under s.69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Acting for Vivendi Universal in LCIA arbitration
proceedings in London against the Polish company
Elektrim SA. The dispute was valued at over 1.7 billion,
and related to Vivendis investment in telecoms assets in
Poland. After awards were rendered in favour of Vivendi
on jurisdiction, liability and quantum, Vivendi successfully
defeated several challenges to the awards in the
Commercial Court in London. This has led to several high
profile reported cases, which are now leading authorities on
challenges to arbitration awards: Elektrim v Vivendi (No1)
[2007] EWHC 11 (Comm); Elektrim v Vivendi (No2)
[2007] EWHC 571 (Comm); Syska & Elektrim v Vivendi
[2008] EWHC 2155 (Comm); Syska & Elektrim v Vivendi
[2009] EWCA Civ 677. The last of these decisions, by the
Court of Appeal, is the first decision to consider the
interpretation of the EU Insolvency Regulation in the
context of an international arbitration.
Representing a Greek shipping group in an ad hoc
arbitration in London concerning the sale and purchase of a
US$100 million very large crude carrier (VLCC), and

Page 31
 ancillary proceedings in the Commercial Court seeking
injunctive relief under s.44 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Acting for a Dutch shipping group to defend a US$50
million claim in an LMAA London arbitration arising from
the termination of a sale and purchase contract for a fleet of
12 container vessels. After obtaining an interim and then a
final award in its favour, the Dutch client recovered its
10% payment deposits for vessels not delivered at the time
of termination, defeating a large counterclaim. The client
then successfully prevented a challenge to the award under
s.69 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Acting for a German company to defend a London seated
arbitration under the ICC Rules threatened by a company
based in Saudi Arabia. The dispute related to a contract for
the design and construction of a production facility for
smart cards in Saudi Arabia.
Acting for a US technology company in arbitration
proceedings against a manufacturing company based in
Slovenia. The dispute concerns a contract for the supply of
professional services and equipment in order to establish a
facility in Slovenia for the production of smart cards. The
arbitration is seated in London and conducted under the
ICDR Rules of the American Arbitration Association.
Acting for a well known US company generating revenue
from advertising from an internet search engine in an
intellectual property arbitration. The dispute involved two
parallel ICC arbitrations, one seated in Tokyo and one in
New York.
Representing a Norwegian company in ICC arbitration
proceedings in London against the other shareholders of a
UK company. The dispute concerned alleged breaches of a
shareholders agreement governed by English law. After a
one week hearing before a sole arbitrator, the Norwegian
client was successful on all issues.
Acting for an Australian online gaming software producer
in an ad hoc arbitration seated in London conducted under
the UNCITRAL Rules. The dispute was governed by the
substantive laws of New South Wales, and concerned
disputed payments due under a joint venture agreement.
Acting for a large steel production company based in the
Middle East to defend claims valued at US$15 million in a

Page 32
 contractual dispute arising from a long-term contract of
affreightment. The dispute is being conducted under the
LMAA Rules and is ongoing.
Acting for an online gaming business to bring claims
against its joint venture partner as a result of a sale of the
joint venture business in breach of alleged pre-emption
rights. The dispute, worth approximately US$20 million,
was conducted under the UNCITRAL Rules, with well
known arbitrator J J Veeder QC sitting as sole arbitrator.
Acting for a German bank in a US$10 million claim
against the Solicitors Indemnity Fund to recover losses
resulting fro the allegedly fraudulent activities of a firm of
English solicitors. The case, brought in ad hoc arbitration
proceedings, concerned the test for dishonesty in the SIF
indemnity policy and under English civil and criminal law
authorities, as well as the proper construction of the SIF
policy limit.
High Court Litigation
Advising a Norwegian offshore energy group in relation to
claims and counterclaims with a total value of more than
GB50 million arising from an engineering construction
project. The project involved the design, construction and
engineering of topsides process facilities onto the Ramform
Banff FPSO. The dispute involved a number of separate
sets of proceedings between the same parties in the
Technology and Construction Court, and led to a one week
hearing in the Court of Appeal.
Acting for Norwegian Cruise Lines (NCL) in litigation in
the Commercial Court relating to the construction of two
new cruise vessels at a shipyard in France. The dispute
involved claims and counterclaims in excess of 200
million, and was one of the largest shipbuilding contract
disputes to go before the English courts for several years.
Acting for a reinsurance lead underwriter and following
reinsurance market to pursue a claim in excess of US$100
million against professional advisers on the grounds of
professional negligence in the conduct of claims arising
from an aviation accident in the Philippines.
Acting for a Finnish bank in Commercial Court
proceedings in relation to a dispute with a Greek shipping

Page 33
 company worth US$25 million. The dispute arose from the
early termination of currency and interest rate swaps
contracts, and the calculation of break costs attributable to
the termination.
Acting for a German bank in relation to a major ship
mortgage fraud. Following successful ex parte applications
for worldwide freezing orders and Norwich Pharmacal
relief, the bank was successful in obtaining judgment
against all defendants following a 6 week trial in the
Commercial Court. The bank then successfully pursued
enforcement actions against each of the debtors.
Acting for a Dutch engineering group against oil
production company Amerada Hess in Commercial Court
and Court of Appeal proceedings relating to a US$20
million contractual dispute. The dispute arose from the
operation of a Floating Production Storage and Off-loading
facility (FPSO) in the North Sea.
Acting for a Dutch engineering group in relation to a
US$15 million dispute arising from a project to design,
manufacture and install a gas compression unit on board an
operational FPSO. The dispute raised complex issues
regarding the conduct and project management of the
project, and the impact of various events on the cost and
scheduling of the project.
Acting for Symphony Financial Partners, a hedge fund
based in Tokyo, in High Court proceedings in London to
pursue trademark infringement claims against another
investment fund using the name Symphony.
Acting for a high net worth individual in relation to a 50
million banking fraud. The claim involved asset tracing
and ancillary proceedings in several jurisdictions including
Switzerland, Gibraltar, the BVI, Spain and Monaco.
Acting for the fuel additive production company, Neuftec
Ltd, to pursue a claim for royalties due under a licence
deed against Oxonica Energy Limited. Neuftec
successfully argued its case in the London High Court,
establishing that royalties were payable under the licence
deed, and then successfully defeated an appeal to the Court
of Appeal. Oxonica Energy Ltd v Neuftec Ltd [2008]
EWHC 2127; Oxonica Energy Ltd v Neuftec Ltd [2009]
EWCA Civ 668.

Page 34
 Acting for a German bank in relation to a major multi-
jurisdictional asset tracing and fraud claim. The case
involved successful applications in the Commercial Court
for worldwide freezing injunctions and search orders, and
various ancillary proceedings in Luxembourg, Switzerland,
Turkey and the BVI.
Acting for Icap Plc and its subsidiaries in litigation in the
High Court in London relating to an alleged breach of a
licence deed and duties of confidentiality. This case led to
proceedings before the Court of Appeal in relation to the
claimants right to interim injunctive relief. Global Coal
Ltd v Intercapital Commodity Swaps Ltd [2005] EWHC
3006; Global Coal Ltd v Icap Energy Ltd [2006] EWCA
Civ 167.

Education

Brasenose College, Oxford University, MA (Oxon)

Professional Activities

Member, Law Society of England & Wales; London Court of

International Arbitration; British Institute of Comparative Law;
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators; IBA
Author, International Alternative, Legal Week (July 2006);
Umbrella Clauses a Retreat from the Philippines?
International Arbitration Law Review (August 2006); Necessity
Knows No Law!: LG&E v Argentina, International Arbitration
Law Review (December 2006); Internationalisation
Contractual Claims in BIT Arbitrations, European Arbitration
Review (2007); Challenges to Arbitrators, European & Middle
Eastern Arbitration Review (2008); C v D - The English Court of
Appeal Upholds an Anti-Suit Injunction in Support of Arbitration
Proceedings, International Arbitration Law Review (April 2008);
The Effects of Insolvency on Arbitration Proceedings, European &
Middle Eastern Arbitration Review (2009); European Law and
International Arbitration, European & Middle Eastern Arbitration
Review (2010)

Page 35
 Joel Hogarth
Partner | jhogarth@omm.com

Joel Hogarth is the coordinator of the Firm's Indonesia practice

and acts as consultant to our associate firm in Jakarta, Tumbuan
& Partners as well as maintaining an office in Singapore. Joel
focuses primarily on Mergers, Acquisitions, Private Equity and
Corporate Finance and also provides practice support for our
other practice areas on cross-border transactions involving
Indonesia.
Resident Office(s)
Jakarta*: Joel is an English and New York qualified lawyer specializing in
Tumbuan & Partners acquisitions and structured investments into emerging markets.
Gandaria Tengah III/8 He has represented investment funds, financial institutions and
Kebayoran Baru
Jakarta Selatan 12130 corporate groups on high profile Asian transactions since 2001.
Indonesia
Joel focuses on mergers and acquisitions and private equity, with
The Plaza Office a strong grounding in special situations and distressed situations.
Tower 41st Floor He employs an extensive knowledge of equity and debt
Jl. M. H. Thamrin
Kavling 28-30 investment techniques, including preference shares, hybrid
Jakarta 10350 instruments, convertible debt, mezzanine and high-yield financing
Indonesia to efficiently structure offshore investments into emerging
markets.
Telephone
+6221 2992 1987
Facsimile Illustrative Professional Experience
+6221 2992 8198
Representation of the selling shareholders in the multiple
award winning divestment of PT Bukit Makmur
Singapore:
Mandiri Utama (BUMA), a major Indonesian mining
9 Raffles Place
#22-01/02 contractor. This leveraged buyout involved a concurrent
Republic Plaza 1 onshore and offshore acquisition, financed by a high-yield
Singapore 048619 bond and syndicated loan, and a simultaneous public and
private equity placement.

Representation of a consortium of investors in the

distressed acquisition of PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk, an
Indonesian listed mobile telecommunications company.

Representation of Goldman Sachs Asia Special

Situations Group and Citigroup Special Situations
Group on the corporate restructuring of their investments

Page 36
 in the Adaro group of operating companies in connection
with the US$1.3bn public offering of PT Adaro Energy
Tbk, the largest initial public offering in Indonesia to date.
This transaction was awarded deal of the year for 2008 by
Asian Counsel magazine.

Development of Secured Transferable Risk

Participations (STRiPs) for a leading Asian private
equity fund, a custom financial instrument designed to
facilitate tax efficient investments into Asian jurisdictions.
The STRiPs were substantively secured economic
participations in high yield and mezzanine debt
instruments, which were successfully placed to a number
of investment funds and leading investment banks in an
inaugural US$200 million offering which closed in
December 2007.

The May 2007 restructuring of SingTel subsidiary, C2C,

which operates a US$2 billion 17,000km undersea cable
network linking North and Southeast Asia. The settlement
comprised not only a restructuring of C2Cs indebtedness,
which was purchased by distressed investment funds and
converted to equity, but also an operational restructuring
and multi-jurisdictional hand-over to the investment
funds. The deal included an agreement to convert
SingTels shareholder undertakings into long-term
purchase commitments, to secure long-term revenues for
C2C and long-term bandwidth supply for SingTel, as well
as an equity upside in the new entity for SingTel.

The US$6 billion restructuring of Asia Pulp and Paper

Groups Indonesian operations, which was successfully
concluded in April 2005. The restructuring involved
banks, bondholders, export credit agencies, investment
funds and other financial institutions around the globe,
exchange offers and tender offers for over US$3 billion of
international bonds, and coordinating insolvency and
litigation proceedings in a number of jurisdictions
simultaneously.

Representation of PT Purinusa Ekapersada in its

restructuring of its eurobonds in the first major Indonesian
composition plan under the new Indonesian bankruptcy

Page 37
 law.

Other Illustrative Experience

Venture capital and multi-tranched mezzanine investment

into an Indonesian cinema megaplex.
Structured private equity and mezzanine investment into
an Indian business process outsourcing company.
Sale of a private equity stake in a major Indonesian
corporate group.
Mandatory convertible debenture issuance by an Indian
real estate development company.
Structured private equity and debt financing investments
into a number of Indonesian coal concessions.
Multi-jurisdictional biodiesel joint venture between a
Singapore listed company, a Malaysian CPO producer and
a Texas energy fund.
Representation of a sovereign wealth fund in its
investment in a major Indonesian leveraged buyout
transaction.
Cumulative compulsorily convertible preference share
(CCCPS) issuance by an Indian engineering services
company.
High yield bond issuance to finance the construction of a
Jakarta serviced apartment and retail complex.
Mezzanine investment into a Malaysian delivery services
company.
Leveraged buyout of an Indonesian coal barging
operation.
Distressed investment into a Thai chemicals company.
Acquisition financing of an Indonesian financial
institution.
Work-out advice on a distressed Philippines power
investment.
Private equity and mezzanine financing of a Singapore-
Indonesian undersea cable development.

Directory Listings

Chambers Asia (2011), Corporate and Commercial

(International Firms), Indonesia
Chambers Asia (2011), Corporate/M&A (International

Page 38
 Firms), Singapore
Chambers Asia (2011), Restructuring and Insolvency
(International Firms), Singapore
Asia Pacific Legal 500 (2009) Capital Markets, Indonesia
IFLR Legal 1000 (2009), Restructuring, Indonesia

Recent Publications and Speaking Engagements

The Indonesia chapter of Juris Publishing practitioners

text Attachment of Assets 15th Edition 2009 edited by
Lawrence W. Newman.
Indonesias Proposed Mandatory Merger Pre-Notification
Regime - International Financial Law Review, May
2010
New Indonesian Tax Regulations have significant
implications for Indonesian Bond Structures - Tax
Planning International Review Journal, December
2009
Impact of New Indonesian Tax Regulations - The Possible
Solutions - International Financial Law Review, March
2010
Broadening of Concessions available for Foreign
Investment - Jakarta Coaltrans Conference, October
2009
Alternative Financing in Emerging Markets - Structuring
and Financing Mergers & Acquisitions Conference,
July 2010

Education

Clare College Cambridge, MA, 2002

University of Central England, LPC, 2000
Clare College Cambridge, BA, 1999

Professional Activities

Admitted, Solicitor of England and Wales; New York

Languages, English; Indonesian

Page 39
 James Barratt
Counsel | jbarratt@omm.com

James Barratt is a counsel in O'Melveny's London office and a

member of the International Practice. James focuses
on international arbitration and has represented clients in numerous
arbitrations under all leading arbitral rules (including ICC and
LCIA) as well as in ad hoc arbitrations at various seats (including
London, Paris, Geneva, Vienna, Hong Kong and New
York). James' broad experience includes representing parties from
Resident Office(s) both common and civil law systems in disputes governed by a
London: wide variety of substantive and procedural laws (including
Warwick Court English, New York, Spanish, French, German, Malaysian and PRC
5 Paternoster Square law). James is an English qualified barrister with full rights of
London EC4M 7DX
England audience before all English courts and has appeared as the sole or
joint advocate before international arbitral tribunals, in several
Telephone trials and in a considerable number of applications.
+44 (20) 7558-4826
Facsimile In addition, James has represented and advised clients on
+44-20-7088-0001
investment treaty disputes, public international law and in
substantial commercial litigation concerning competition law,
banking and finance and fraud. James regularly advises on choice
of law and jurisdictional issues including the international
enforcement of arbitration awards and judgments. James has a
particular focus on disputes concerning the following sectors: joint
ventures, M&A, investment banking, project finance, insurance
and reinsurance, aerospace and defence, pharmaceuticals,
technological, telecommunications, construction, energy, shipping
and the airline industry. James joined OMelveny from a leading
international arbitration practice.

Illustrative Professional Experience

Representing a Latin American state in an international

arbitration arising out of the purchase of a naval vessel.
The dispute is subject to English law and involves
analyzing the impact of certain Presidential decrees upon
the parties obligations.
Representing a multinational aerospace and defence
corporation in an ICC arbitration against a Spanish
technology company involving the break up of a joint

Page 40
 venture and the ownership of intellectual property
rights. These parallel Madrid and London sited
arbitrations, governed by Spanish law, involved amounts in
dispute exceeding US$250 million and was settled on
highly favourable terms, after the tribunal awarded
provisional measures.
Representing a state-owned oil company in a dispute with a
multinational involving the proper treatment of energy
rights under various Production Sharing Agreements. The
dispute was subject to arbitration under the Arbitration
Rules of a South East Asian regional arbitration body. The
value of the amount subject to dispute exceeded US$1
billion.
Representing a multinational energy company in an ICC
arbitration concerning the design and construction of a
major FPSO in South East Asia.
Representing a leading US pharmaceutical company in a
US$65 million ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration sited in
Paris, involving an IP-related contractual dispute. The case
involved a successful application to determine a
preliminary issue as to a scope of an exclusion clause.
James also achieved the successful resolution of a dispute
over the applicable law of privilege under the IBA Rules on
the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial
Arbitration.
Representing a Chinese semiconductor foundry in a
HKIAC arbitration concerning a technology transfer
agreement with a major US technology company. The case
involved the application of PRC law and the tribunal ruled
against the counterpartys attempt to introduce wide-
ranging disclosure into this international arbitration.
Representing a major telecommunications company in a
series of Vienna-sited VIAC arbitrations over the control of
a major joint venture in Central Europe. The investment in
dispute was worth in excess of 2 billion.
Representing an international organisation in an ICC
arbitration concerning disputes under an agreement with a
consortium of companies in the transport sector. The case
involved the successful response to an application for
interim and conservatory measures under Article 23 of the
ICC Rules.
Advising a major multinational on its investment protection

Page 41
 claims against a Sovereign State in Eastern Europe. The
case involved claims of expropriation and denial of justice
under a BIT.
Advising a Scandinavian shipping company on the merits
of commencing an LCIA arbitration against a US
competitor which commenced class action proceedings in
breach of the arbitration agreement.
Advising a European airline on the merits of commencing
LCIA arbitration proceedings in a dispute between carrier
members of a joint venture in the airline industry.
Representing a US pharmaceutical company in a US$460
million litigation governed by English law concerning IP
and contractual disputes under a joint-venture agreement
with a Swiss company. The case involved a complex
multi-layered expert determination dispute resolution
process.
Representing a US/Scandinavian manufacturer of
healthcare equipment in a post-acquisition dispute subject
to English High Court jurisdiction. The case involved the
successful use of negative declaratory relief and an anti-suit
injunction.
Representing a defendant European airline in the US class
action concerning an alleged worldwide air cargo price-
fixing cartel. The case involved a contested Motion to
Dismiss and advising in respect of the res judicata effect of
any US judgment on the English courts.
Advising and representing a hedge fund in relation to
accelerating payment of US$350 million of bonds. The
case involved negotiating successfully with the Trustee to
issue notices to accelerate payment of the amount due
under the bonds.
Advising and representing a US based hedge fund in
relation to potential claims of unfair prejudice and
misrepresentation arising out of the refinancing a UK-based
energy company.
Advising an investment bank in respect of its potential
liabilities arising out of a failed multi-billion dollar
leveraged buy-out. The case involved an analysis as to the
scope of the banks contractual and equitable obligations of
confidence to the proposed target and assessing the risks of
a potential claim for breach of fiduciary duty.
Representing a well-known fine musical instrument retailer

Page 42
 in a dispute with an international competitor concerning the
alleged conversion of a 2 million instrument.

Education

The City Law School, Bar

Vocational Course
Selwyn College, University of Cambridge, M.A. (Hons.), 1999

Professional Activities

Admitted, Barrister, Supreme Court of England and Wales

Member, International Chamber of Commerce; London Court of
International Arbitration; International Bar Association; British
Institute of International and Comparative Law; Young
International Arbitration Group
Licensed, MCIArb, London (Chartered Institute of Arbitrators)
Author, "Lost in Translation? The Independence of Experts under
the 2010 IBA Rules," The European and Middle Eastern
Arbitration Review (2012)
Co-Author, "Economic sanctions laws: the European Union and
the United States," a chapter published in Serious Economic
Crime: A Boardroom Guide to Prevention and Compliance
(Published by White Page Ltd in association with the Serious
Fraud Office; December 2011) (with Greta Lichtenbaum and
Hayley Ichilcik); "European Law and International Arbitration,"
The European and Middle Eastern Arbitration Review (2010);
"Future of Class Actions in the European Union," The John Liner
Review, Vol. 23, No. 3, (Fall 2009); "Perspectives from Europe: A
Pan-European Tour of a Changing Landscape," The John Liner
Review, Vol. 23, No. 2, (Summer 2009)
Presenter, "Recent Developments in Pre-Appointment Disclosure
Obligations of Arbitrators," International Chamber of Commerce,
Young Arbitrators Forum seminar, London (October 2009);
"Cross-Examination in International Arbitration," DIS 40 (German
Arbitration Association), Frankfurt, Germany (September 2009);
"Witness Examination in International Arbitration," DIS 40
(German Arbitration Association), Dusseldorf, Germany (May
2009)
Language, Portuguese

Page 43
 Ashley Bell
Counsel | abell@omm.com

Ashley Bell is a Counsel and Registered Foreign Lawyer in

OMelvenys Singapore office.

Ashley has over 8 years experience resolving cross-border

commercial disputes in Asia and has represented a wide range of
clients in international arbitrations conducted under various
institutional and ad hoc rules, including those of the ICC, SIAC,
HKIAC, ICSID, CIETAC and UNCITRAL. He has also
Resident Office(s)
Singapore: represented clients in respect of a range of commercial litigation
9 Raffles Place and contentious insolvency and restructuring matters across the
#22-01/02 region.
Republic Plaza 1
Singapore 048619 Ashley is qualified in Hong Kong, England & Wales and
Telephone
Queensland, Australia and previously worked in leading
+65-6593-1875 commercial dispute resolution practices in Hong Kong and
Facsimile Australia.
+65-6593-1801
Illustrative Professional Experience
Hong Kong:
31st Floor, AIA Representing an international private equity fund in SIAC
Central arbitration proceedings concerning the failure by an
1 Connaught Road Indonesian company to redeem US$36 million senior
Central secured notes which were issued to finance the
Hong Kong
S.A.R.
development of a retail complex.
Acting for a Thai steel mill operator in an ICC arbitration
Telephone concerning the alleged failure of a consulting firm to
+852-3512-4011 adequately supervise the commissioning of the steel mill;
Facsimile Representing a regional construction contractor in
+852-2522-1760
UNCITRAL ad hoc arbitration proceedings concerning
the delayed and defective construction of an office tower
in Hong Kong.
Acting for an Indonesian media and telecommunications
company defending ICC arbitration proceedings
commenced by a Korean telecommunications company
concerning the exercise of certain put options.
Representing the charterer of an oil tanker in ICC
arbitration proceedings concerning contractual claims
relating to the condition of the vessel and allegedly out of
specification and injurious cargo.

Page 44
 Representing a petitioning creditor in contested winding-
up proceedings (and subsequent appeals) in Hong Kong,
Malaysia and the Philippines following a large investment
in, and attempted restructuring of, casino operations in the
Philippines.
Acting for a Japanese contractor appealing an arbitration
award in Hong Kong and opposing recognition and
enforcement of the award on the ground that Japanese
corporate rehabilitation proceedings had been commenced
and principles of international comity required that the
rehabilitation proceedings be recognized.
Acting for a global financial institution in Hong Kong
proceedings concerning the ownership of gold bars, the
purchase of which was financed by the bank pursuant to
certain trade finance arrangements.
Acting for a developer in a lengthy mediation arising out
of an infrastructure project in Hong Kong. The contractor
sought additional costs and extensions of time due to
unforeseen physical conditions, alleged variations,
impossibility and frustration.
Representing an international advertising company
defending litigation commenced in the High Court of
Hong Kong concerning the failed acquisition of a number
of joint ventures in the People's Republic of China.
Advising an international bank in CIETAC arbitration
proceedings concerning a dispute with contractors over
the delayed construction of a showroom and convention
development in Shanghai.
Acting for an international hotel group in litigation
concerning the failed acquisition of a hotel property in
Australia.
Acting for a large cement company defending litigation
proceedings commenced by former customers alleging
losses suffered as a result of price fixing and anti-
competitive behaviour.
Acting for a government-owned water corporation in
respect of a contractual dispute concerning the defective
construction of a water treatment plant.

Page 45
Education
PGDip in International Arbitration and Dispute Settlement,
University of Hong Kong;
LLB (First Class Honours) and Bachelor of Business (with
distinction), Queensland University of Technology.

Professional Activities
Registered Foreign Lawyer, Singapore.
Solicitor, Hong Kong, England and Wales and Queensland
(Australia).

Page 46
 Desmond Ang
Counsel | dang@omm.com

Desmond Ang is a counsel in O'Melveny's Hong Kong office, a

Registered Foreign Lawyer in OMelvenys Singapore office, and
a member of the Business Trial and Litigation Practice within
the Litigation Department. Desmond specializes in the resolution
of Sino-foreign joint venture disputes and has advised foreign
investors in China in relation to their rights under bilateral and
multilateral investment treaties. Desmond has represented clients
Resident Office(s) in proceedings conducted under the ICC, HKIAC, CIETAC,
Hong Kong: SIAC and UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules as well as experience in
31st Floor, AIA arbitrations conducted under the auspices of other institutional
Central rules such as ICSID and the SCC. He also has experience in
1 Connaught Road
Central litigation ancillary to international arbitrations, including
Hong Kong enforcement and Mareva proceedings before the Singapore High
S.A.R. Court. He also has experience representing defendants in high
profile white-collar criminal investigations including representing
Telephone the CEO of a Singapore subsidiary of a Chinese state-owned
+852 3512-2350
Facsimile entity and a former politician in Singapore.
+852-2522-1760
Desmond previously worked in a leading arbitration practice in
Singapore and practised law at a major international law firm in
Singapore:
9 Raffles Place London.
#22-01/02
Republic Plaza 1 Illustrative Professional Experience
Singapore 048619
Telephone Representing a US conglomerate in three consolidated
+65-6593-1800
Facsimile UNCITRAL ad hoc arbitrations in Hong Kong in relation
+65-6593-1801 to a dispute against its Chinese joint venture partner
arising from the purchase of a substantial power control
system facility in Shanghai.
Representing a major European energy company in a
US$80m claim against a Chinese state-owned company in
an ad hoc arbitration in Singapore regarding breaches
under a share transfer arrangement.
Defending a PRC listed company in a US$100m Hong
Kong arbitration conducted under the HKIAC Rules
regarding a joint-venture dispute in connection with the
set-up and management of a luxury department store in

Page 47
 Beijing.
Defending a US leisure goods conglomerate in an SIAC
arbitration against allegations of breach of a worldwide
exclusive distribution agreement.
Defending one of the PRCs leading copper producers in
an SIAC arbitration in connection with a dispute over its
joint-venture investment in a copper strip plant in China.
Defending a US tire manufacturer in two CIETAC
arbitration proceedings in Beijing commenced by a
Chinese OEM manufacturer involving product liability
issues.
Representing the energy division of a leading Malaysian
investment holding company in connection with
commencing a CIETAC arbitration concerning the
operations of one its power plants in China. The value of
the dispute is in excess of RMB 2 billion.
Representing a leading European commercial real estate
developer in connection with a potential HKIAC dispute
over its purchase of the entire share capital of a PRC
property development company which is currently
engaged in the development of a major office and retail
centre in Shanghai.
Advising one of UKs largest London-listed specialty
chemicals producer in connection with a potential Chinese
Arbitration Association dispute arising from the
acquisition of a Taiwanese chemical company.
Advising a leading South Korean conglomerate on the
merits of commencing an HKIAC arbitration concerning
its joint venture investment in Mainland China.
Coordinating the defence of a European company in
relation to its joint venture dispute with its local joint
venture partner in litigation proceedings before the
Shanghai courts.
Advising a BVI investment vehicle in a potential
shareholders derivative action before the Hong Kong
courts in respect of certain decisions taken by the
investment vehicle and its majority shareholders to
dispose of a major commercial property in Beijings
Financial District.
Advising a French private equity house based in
Singapore in relation to its dispute resolution strategy
concerning a dispute arising from an offshore financing

Page 48
 which it had provided in relation to the privatization of a
Singapore listed company and subsequent restructuring
into a Bermudean company.
Advising a Hong Kong listed company in relation to an
investigation by the Securities and Futures Commission
concerning alleged offences committed in relation to the
disclosure of false or misleading information to induce
transactions in its shares on the Hong Kong stock
exchange.
Advising for a multinational consulting firm in an ICC
arbitration seated in Zurich involving a multi-million
claim against a leading European conglomerate in
connection with the design and construction of a high-
speed rail link in China.
Acting in a London-seated ICC arbitration for an
Indonesian multimedia listed company in connection with
a shareholders dispute.
Advising in an ICC arbitration in Hong Kong for a
shareholder of a telecommunications conglomerate in a
US$50m dispute arising from the sale and purchase of
shares to a major European company.
Advising a multinational energy company in a US$500m
claim in a Stockholm arbitration conducted under SCC
rules, arising from the breach of a petroleum exploration
and production contract.
Representing one of the PRC's leading automobile
manufacturers in a New York arbitration conducted under
SCC Rules in connection with a dispute over the alleged
distribution of its vehicles in South America.

Education

National University of Singapore, LL.B., Law: Dean's List

Professional Activities

Admitted, Hong Kong, Singapore and England and Wales

Member, Singapore Academy of Law, LCIA Young
International Arbitration Group, Law Society of England and
Wales, Hong Kong Law Society
Co-Author, Challenging Arbitral Awards Under the Model Law
in Singapore and New Zealand, paper presented at New Zealand

Page 49
Arbitration Day Conference, Auckland, NZ, 2006; Singapore
Court of Appeal rules that the Doctrine of Champerty applies in
Arbitration Proceedings (Otech Pakistan Pvt Ltd v Clough
Engineering Ltd), Vol. 4, No. 5, Transnational Dispute
Management (September 2007); International Arbitration
Institutions, Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre
(HKIAC) and China International Economic And Trade
Arbitration Commission (CIETAC), Vol. 3, World Arbitration
Reporter - 2nd Edition, (April 2010)
Languages, English, Mandarin Chinese, Cantonese

Page 50
 Ratih (Ipop) Nawangsari
Counsel | rnawangsari@omm.com

Ratih Nawangsari (or Ipop) is a counsel in OMelvenys Jakarta

office and a member of the Transactions Department.

Ipop specializes in oil and gas/natural resources, general

corporate, finance and projects work in Indonesia. She also has
broad experience in assignments relating to foreign investments,
financing, mergers and acquisitions, the power sector, natural
Resident Office(s) resources and capital market in Indonesia. Prior to joining the
Singapore: firm, she was a foreign legal consultant with Latham & Watkins
9 Raffles Place LLP in Singapore, and before that a senior associate with
#22-01/02 Hadiputranto, Hadinoto & Partners, one of the major Indonesian
Republic Plaza 1
Singapore 048619 law firms in Jakarta.

Telephone Ipop is admitted to practice in Indonesia. She has been in practice

+65 6593-1822 since 1996, during which she has advised clients from various
Facsimile industries in numerous types of multinational transactions.
+65 6593-1801

Illustrative Professional Experience

Jakarta*:
Tumbuan & Partners
Gandaria Tengah III/8
Kebayoran Baru
Jakarta Selatan 12130
Indonesia
The Plaza Office
Tower 41st Floor
Jl. M. H. Thamrin
Kavling 28-30
Jakarta 10350
Indonesia
Representation of an ad-hoc committee of bondholders
regarding the restructuring of US$238 million in high
yield bonds issued by PT Davomas Abadi Tbk.
Representation of a strategic investor in a structured
investment into a listed Indonesian telecom company.
Advising a Japanese listed company on a structured
investment into an Indonesian coal concession.
Advising the Senior Mezzanine noteholders on the
restructuring of the US$525 million indebtedness of a
major Indonesian offshore platform company.
Representation of a major Chinese company in a proposed
investment in an Indonesian agribusiness company.
Representation of senior creditors in relation to the
US$360 million and IDR1.18 trillion financing of PT
Professional Telekomunikasi Indonesia.
Representation of creditors in relation to the financing of a
major power project in East Java, Indonesia.
Representation of Pertamina as a senior secured lender in

Page 51
 a re-financing deal for Java Energy by United Overseas
Bank in relation to the expansion of aromatic plant
production of PT Trans Pacific Petrochemical Indotama
(TPPI).
Representation of the underwriters in connection with the
US$400 million high-yield bond offering by Adaro
Finance B.V. The bond offering was made concurrently
with a US$200 million senior credit facility borrowed by
Adaro Finance B.V., with P.T. Adaro Indonesia and P.T.
Indonesia Bulk Terminal as guarantors. This deal was
named Best Non-Investment Grade Bond Deal 2005 by
FinanceAsia and Southeast Asia Deal of the Year 2005
by Asian Legal Business.
Representation of Jefferies International Limited, as
placement agent, in connection with a private placement
of US$90 million in ordinary shares of Agri International
Resources Pte. Ltd. and US$150 million of 10.875%
senior secured notes due 2012 by AI Finance B.V., a
subsidiary of Agri International Resources Pte. Ltd.
Representation of the issuer, Indo Integrated Energy
B.V., (a Dutch SPV) in connection with the US$250
million 8.5% senior notes due 2012, guaranteed by the
Indonesian parent company (PT Indika Inti Energi), and
subsequent public offering of shares of PT Indika Energy
Tbk.
Representation of Clarity China Partners, L.P, in
relation to an acquisition of interest in a Singapore based
company with major mining asset in Indonesia.
Representation of US private equity firm Indigo Partners
in connection with its acquisition of a 49% stake in
Mandala Airlines. This is the first foreign acquisition of
an Indonesian airline.
Representation of JPower and Keppel consortium in
connection with the acquisition of Powergens interest in
PT Jawa Power (an Indonesian power company) and PT
Powergen Jawa Timur (an Indonesian power support
service company).
Representation of Astra International in connection with
the proposed acquisition of interest in a first generation
coal contract of work company.
Representation of Genting Sanyen on the acquisition of
interests held by El Paso in PT Energi Sengkang (an

Page 52
 Indonesian power company) and Energi Equity Sengkang
(a gas operation project company in Indonesia).
Representation of SUEK (Russian Coal Company) in
relation to its proposed mining activities in Indonesia.
Representation of CNOOC in connection with a gas sales
agreement with PT PLN.
Representation of Pertamina (the Indonesian state-owned
oil and gas company) in connection with the signing of the
oil and gas upstream cooperation contract and upstream
corporate restructuring in accordance with the New Oil
and Gas Law.
Representation of Shell Oil and Gas Company in
connection with its proposed oil and gas downstream
activities in Indonesia.
Representation of Southern Arc Minerals Inc. in
connection with its proposed acquisition of mining
interests under an existing contract of work and mining
authority (kuasa pertambangan).

Education

University of Indonesia Faculty of Law, Bachelor of Law (SH),

1996
University of Michigan Law School, Master of Laws (LL.M.),
2001

Professional Activities

Admitted, Indonesia
Member, Indonesian Legal Counsel Association (Ikatan
Penasehat Hukum Indonesia IPHI) and the Association of the
Indonesian Advocate (Perhimpunan Advokat Indonesia -
PERADI)
Languages, Bahasa Indonesia; English and French
(conversational)

Page 53
Offices

Beijing Jakarta* New York Silicon Valley

Yin Tai Centre, Office Tower, 37th Floor Tumbuan & Partners Times Square Tower 2765 Sand Hill Road
No. 2 Jianguomenwai Ave. Gandaria Tengah III/8 7 Times Square Menlo Park, CA 94025
Chao Yang District Kebayoran Baru New York, NY 10036 +1-650-473-2600
Beijing 100022 Jakarta Selatan 12130 +1-212-326-2000
Peoples Republic of China Indonesia Singapore
+86-10-6563-4200 Newport Beach 9 Raffles Place
The Plaza Office Tower 41st Floor 610 Newport Center Drive, 17th Floor #22-01/02
Brussels Jl. M. H. Thamrin Kavling 28-30 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Republic Plaza 1
Blue Tower Jakarta 10350 +1-949-760-9600 Singapore 048619
Avenue Louise 326 Indonesia +65-6593-1800
1050 Brussels, Belgium +6221-2992-1988
+32-2-642-4100 San Francisco Tokyo
London Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor Meiji Yasuda Seimei Building
Century City Warwick Court San Francisco, CA 94111 11th Floor
1999 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor 5 Paternoster Square +1-415-984-8700 2-1-1, Marunouchi
Los Angeles, CA 90067 London, EC4M 7DX, England Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0005,
+1-310-553-6700 +44-20-7088-0000 Japan

Shanghai +81-3-5293-2700
Hong Kong Los Angeles Plaza 66 Tower 1, 37th Floor
31st Floor, AIA Central 400 South Hope Street 1266 Nanjing Road West Washington, DC
1 Connaught Road Central Los Angeles, CA 90071 Shanghai 200040 1625 Eye Street, NW
Hong Kong S.A.R. +1-213-430-6000 Peoples Republic of China Washington, DC 20006
+852-3512-2300 +86-21-2307-7000 +1-202-383-5300

www.omm.com

* OMelveny & Myers LLP in Association with Tumbuan & Partners

Tumbuan & Partners serve as consultants to OMelveny & Myers LLP on matters of Indonesian law, and OMelveny & Myers LLP serves as consultants to Tumbuan
& Partners on certain matters of American, English, European Union, Hong Kong and Japanese law. The two firms operate in a non-exclusive association to
provide integrated Indonesian and international legal services to clients; however, the two firms remain separate partnerships, and representation by one firm does
not constitute representation by, or result in or permit the sharing of client information with, the other unless each such client and the firm in question agree in
advance thereto in writing.

Portions of this communication may contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Please direct all inquiries regarding New Yorks Rules of Professional
Conduct to OMelveny & Myers LLP, Times Square Tower, 7 Times Square, New York, NY, 10036, Phone:+1-212-326-2000.
Feburary 2011 OMelveny & Myers LLP. All Rights Reserved.