International Court of Arbitration Cour internationale d'arbitrage ...

32Valvision was aware of this obligation as the SPA expressly referred to thecompulsory procedure to be followed towards the Minority Shareholders (SPA,§3.3.1.).The General Agreement, although entered into between KPN and the MinorityShareholders (KPN to whom Vision N.V. had succeeded as shareholder ofRCF), was valid as against Valvision, pursuant to the external effects of contracts(article 1165 of the French Civil Code).As a consequence, Valvision was obliged to acknowledge the existence of theGeneral Agreement and respect its consequences. The Minority Shareholdershad the right under the General Agreement to be notified of the sale to Valvision,whether or not this notification took place within the deadline provided forin the SPA.Therefore, the causal connexion between the failure and the claimed damagesrequired by Article 6: 74 (NBW) §1 lacks.56. Furthermore, the purpose of the 3 Business Days notification period wasto ensure that Valvision was not left uncertain as to the possible exercise oftheir pre-emption rights by the Minority Shareholders. This 3-day period fromthe SPA combined with the 20-day period for the exercise of the pre-emptionright under the General Agreement gave the measure of Valvision's period ofuncertainty.The fact that the initial 3-day time period was exceeded had only one consequence,i.e. the extension by one or 4 days of the period of uncertainty, as theCore Minority Shareholders ended up exercising their rights.Once the pre-emption rights had been exercised under the General Agreement,this technical violation of the 3-day period for notification under the SPA couldnot have caused damage different from that resulting from the exercise of thepre-emption rights.The Arbitral Tribunal will now review the modalities of the exercise of the preemptionrights.D. THE COMPUTATION OF THE 20 BUSINESS DAY PRE-EMPTION PE-RIOD1. The applicable Provisions57. According to the General Agreement, Brussels and Gillam WiNmr 0a pre-emption right in case of sale of the RCF shares byholder. The significant provision regarding the pre-e right is encom- 04,passed in Article 4.3.2 of the General Agreement. A sc IrJFJUU1N`ICAC'f'SRMRAGEltnA02338488/0.31/16 Oct 2002INTERNATIONAL COURT OF AR.EI`RA.TION VCAL CHAMBER