CLARIFICATIONS

(1) Questions relating to the discussions and negotiation preceding the Tender Documents and the
drafting of the latter.
(2) Questions relating to the negotiation, drafting and conclusion of the Sales Agreement.
(3) Questions concerning the Code of Conducts and the Parties Corporate Social
Responsibility policies.
(4) Questions concerning the arbitration clause.
(5) Questions concerning the relationship of Mr. Prasad to the Third Party Funder and its
subsidiaries.
- What was the position of Mr. Prasad as arbitrator on the two arbitrations funded by FindFunds LP? Presiding
Arbitrator or was he indicated by one of the parties? If indicated by one of the parties, was it the winner or
losing party?
(The answer can show a further involvement or independency from Mr. Prasad, the parties in the arbitration,
and the Third Party Fundings)
- Does Funding 12 and the other two subsidiaries has independence on its decisions or they are took by
Findfunds LP?
(Considering that the arbitrators which Mr. Prasad was involved were funded by subsidiaries of Findfunds LP,
the answer can explain if the subsidiaries of FindFunds LP has a close relation which can create reasonable
grounds for challenge)
- Was there any evidence of the Ruritania cacau scandal prior to the release of the Equatoriana documentary
where CLAIMANT could be aware of it?
(Depending on the answer CLAIMANT can show that did everything that was on its power, as well as
RESPONDENT can say that CLAIMANT did not did everything on its power)
(6) Questions concerning the relationship of Mr. Prasad to the law firm Fasttrack & Partners
- When the arbitratrion which Slowfood's partner is acting has started?
(The answer will show if the arbitrator has started before or after the merge, an important fact to justify a
possible challenge)
- What is the main object of the arbitrator that Slowfood's partner is acting for?
(The answer may explain if the object is close to this arbitrator, creating, or not, a ground for challenge).
(7) Questions concerning other issues relating to the alleged lack of independence and
impartiality.
(8) Questions relating to the applicable laws and rules to the case and in the countries
concerned.
- Are the involved countries (Ruritania, Mediterranean, danubia and Equatoriana) signatory members of the
NY Convention?
(If the involved countries are signatory of the NY Convention, the parties cannot deviate from the wording of
the clause, having the risk of annulment of the award. Then, CLAIMANT may argue that the parties cannot
exclude the Article 13(4) UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, as well as RESPONDENT can argue that no
arbitration institution shall be involved, and then a deviation from the clause is necessary.)
(9) Other questions.