"Mayo, when was it established that arbitration terminates possible issuance of the permit?"

I think what's being referred to is Paragraph 3 of Article XII of the "Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of Venezuela for the Promotion and Protection of Investments", which states: An investor may submit a dispute as referred to in paragraph (1) to arbitration in accordance with paragraph (4) only if: (b) the investor has waived its right to initiate or continue any other proceedings in relation to the measure that is alleged to be in breach of this Agreement before the courts or tribunals of the Contracting Party concerned or in a dispute settlement procedure of any kind;

The way I read that, the arbitration process must be unencumbered by any other attempts to resolve the dispute. No other court, tribunal or dispute settlement procedure of any kind. So, arbitration seems very much to be an either/or choice.

Lar

I agree with Lar's interpretation.

I would like to add- If parties involved in an arbitration dispute are allowed to "direct deal" it makes any contract almost worthless.

My take on Part 4(b): It allows Venezuela to offer "deals" during arbitration but under the written rules KRY cannot "deal" directly with Venezuela on any issues of the contract that have been contested by KRY and are being disputed in arbitration. This is the agreemnent between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of Venezuela.

I do not know what the agreemnents between Switzerland and the Government of the Republic of Venezuela are concerning Holcim.

Bob