§ 5 Claims Made By The Joint Venture Against Third Parties and By Third Parties Against The Joint Venture

181. In view of the above facts, the Arbitral Tribunal finds that the common intent of the Parties has been, not only when they entered into the Contract but also at all relevant times, to consider the phrase “the Contractor” and then “the Claimant” to refer to the two separate corporate entities which the Parties consistently agreed the Claimant was “composed” of. In other words, the phrase “the Claimant” should be construed as designating the two Turkish companies […]…

182. Therefore, the Arbitral Tribunal does not need to decide whether this Arbitration should have been filed in the separate names of […]…

183. As the legal existence and standing to file Arbitration of each one of these companies individually has not been challenged, at least in this Arbitration, it should be ruled that they filed the Request for Arbitration together and are both Parties to this Arbitration for all practical and legal matters.…

A classical issue of admissibility of a claim is that of whether one joint venture…