“Consulting Concepts International and Consumer Protection Association Using a comprehensive systems approach to change, hereby commit to: . Successfully assume the implementation and management of a progressive pulmonary healthcare reform. . Facilitate the expertise of medical professionals and healthcare administrator to participate through the initial phases of establishing an all-encompassing healthcare network throughout the Kingdom. . Devise a compelling marketing campaign to bring public awareness of preventive pulmonary healthcare management, proven drug therapies, as well as control and maintenance treatment protocols.”
“Seek government support to regulate a state-wide Asthma/COPD healthcare reform system, by demanding updated medical training and continuing education of pulmonary disorders for all primary care physicians, particularly pediatricians. Establish a bilateral collaboration between the Health Ministry and Education Ministry to promote better understanding of the causes, symptoms, and therapies available to control and treat asthma among school-age children. Seek co-op marketing partnerships and sponsorships from public/private sources, intending to provide a continual Asthma/COPD awareness program to the population. A well planned marketing campaign's progression and success will prove to be a lasting mission. Establish and anchor our commercial talents and business capabilities by enhancing our corporate presence in the society through education, marketing and public relations, as well as through strategic pro bono investments within the community.”
“All invoices submitted by CCI will be paid within 90 days if funds of Stakeholders are available, by submission of said Invoice by Consumer Protection Association to a Bank account designated by CCI.”
“Due Immediately Upon Invoice as per Agreement with CPA dated June 4, 2013”
“In accordance with the agreement made between the Consumer Protection Association and Consulting Concepts, an international company based in New York City, in the United States of America, for conducting studies, research and consultations regarding the activities of the association. Whereas the said company has performed consultations and multiple studies in this field, the Association undertakes to pay to Mr. Massimiliano Pincione in the amount of one hundred sixty-one million five hundred five thousand riyals, provided that the amount will be transferred to the account in the name of Massimiliano Pincione by December 31, 2013, and this is an undertaking thereto. Thanks are due to Mr. Max and his colleagues for the professional work and effort exerted for undertaking such studies, research and consultations to prepare the Association for performing its duties in the best way in accordance with the regulations of the Association and on the bases of our rulers' aspirations and consumers' satisfaction. And God is the source of strength. Executive Board Chairman Association Chairman [Signed] Dr. Nasser bin Ibrahim Al Twaim”
“The past 5 weeks or so have been challenging for Mr. Pincione. He has had a setback in his recovery and has been experiencing fevers, chills, nausea, and chronic fatigue. Mr Pincione has been home during this period and for the most part bedridden. I have recommended to Mr. Pincione to convalesce at home for the next month hoping that he will feel better...”
““You will invoice EPIC on a monthly basis for work completed to date. The basis of payment proposed in the appendix to the document described above is acceptable. EPIC Ltd will endeavour to make payment within 30 days of receipt (unless otherwise stated)”.”
“I do not accept Mr Wright’s submission that, on an objective interpretation of the relevant paragraph of the letter of10th July 2007 , the parties were agreeing that ICE’s entitlement to payment did not arise until 30 days after receipt of the invoice. A reasonable person in the position of the parties would have understood the words in the letter to be an agreement concerning only the process of billing and payment, namely the monthly provision of an invoice with payment within 30 days thereafter. This construction arises from a plain reading of the section of the letter under scrutiny. Further, in the context of the letter, it is common sense that both parties would have wished to reach some agreement concerning the billing and payment arrangements; the design work was not a single piece of work, but a rolling design project which was to be ongoing over a period of many months. In these circumstances, some agreement concerning billing and payment would have been important and on an objective construction of the intention of the parties the payment terms of the letter reflect just such an agreement. The letter elsewhere refers to the budgeting constraints which affected EPIC and the agreement to the costings proposed by ICE only on the condition that Council funding was available. Monthly invoicing would therefore have been important, certainly for EPIC, as a means of keeping a running check on the financial outlay on design services.”
“Further, I accept Mr Finn’s submission that the obiter statement of Lord Neuberger in Henshaw, that clear words are needed if the timing of the accrual of the cause of action in an action for work or services is to be displaced, is relevant. Mr Wright relies upon the requirement in the letter that invoices should be provided by ICE each month as an answer to the potential mischief that otherwise the creditor would have control of the time at which the limitation period starts running. However, this is not a satisfactory answer to the point. Chitty LJ in Coburn was clear that the central purpose of the statutory limitation regime is to provide the creditor with a degree of protection by the certainty (my emphasis) of a fixed period during which a claim can be brought and to avoid the Courts becoming embroiled in collateral issues such as, in the context of Coburn, whether there was unreasonable delay in submitting a bill of costs or, in the context of the appeal, whether the invoice had, in fact, been delivered within a month of completion of the relevant work; if not, whether there was a reasonable explanation or excuse; whether the Respondent had paid within 30 days or “endeavoured” to do so, or otherwise stated (which is the relevant term in the letter of10th July 2007 ). In these circumstances, it seems to me that clear words are needed if the Court is to construe an agreement between the parties in such a way as to give the creditor control over the start of the limitation period and/or to avoid the Courts becoming engaged in determining satellite issues which deprive the limitation provisions of their central purpose: certainty and the avoidance of stale claims. Such clear words do not appear in the letter.”
“After the Claimant had completed some of its work, by the fall of 2013 I was becoming concerned that the Defendant had not made any payments so I asked Dr Nasser Al Tweam and other members of the Defendant’s Board for written assurance that payment would be made. The result was that the Defendant supplied an “Undertaking and Commitment”
“[17] However, I want to say more about the background to the Undertaking and expand on paragraph 8 of my First Witness Statement. Before the Undertaking I had become alarmed because Dr Nasser had told me that I might have to wait a bit longer to get paid. At the time of the Undertaking (it was provided to me on2 October 2013 ) the Claimant was already carrying out significant work at the Defendant's request and I wanted a level of assurance that the Claimant would be paid. In paragraph 8 of my First Witness Statement, I had also intended to say that the Undertaking was provided in anticipation that the Claimant would be performing a significant amount of additional work (the Studies) and the continued implementation of the asthma reform in the near future. (In error the second part of this sentence was omitted from paragraph 8, leaving an incomplete sentence. I apologise for this). [18] In this regard I refer to the Claimant's Prospectus for "Planning & Managing Asthma Healthcare" (Exhibit MP2). I provided this Prospectus to Dr Nasser in late June 2013. The Budget Summary of the Prospectus forecast a cost of US$ 42,000,000 over 3 years. Most of the costs (US$ 21,525,000 ) were to be incurred in the first year. These costs were a forecast of charges to be made by the Claimant for capital expenditures and human resources. [19] Dr Nasser approved work programme in the Prospectus and the Claimant began mobilizing in finding doctors and subject matter experts both in health and IT and did phase one which was the Asthma report.”
“In other words, it is recording the making of the First Agreement as alleged by C, it is recording the doing of the work under that agreement as alleged by C, and it is recording how D is to pay C (ie via the bank account of its Chairman Mr Pincione in riyals) for having done its work. It is simply recording a mode by which D would discharge its liabilities under the First Agreement for the work so far carried out, ie by making a payment of 161,505,000 riyals by 31/12/13 to the account in the name of Mr Massimiliano Pincione.”