There is no evidence such as tender and other documents prepared in making the bid for the project, invoices, or correspondence with subcontractors and suppliers selected for the project, to demonstrate that the claimed costs were actually incurred.

Apart from reference to the projects, these six invoices did not refer to Granit.

The Panel finds that National Projects did not provide sufficient evidence in support of its claim for contract losses. In particular, National Projects did not provide copies of the contracts for either project, invoices for work performed, evidence of payment by National Projects of the retention money, evidence of repayment of the advance made by the owners of the projects and taking over certificates.

Accordingly, the Panel recommends no award of compensation to Inspekta for unpaid invoices with respect to the Trans-Iraq dry gas pipeline project because the invoices relate to debts and obligations of Iraq arising prior to 2 August 1990.

The owner of the project is not mentioned in the materials submitted by Elettra, although a claim filed before the Commission by Saipem in relation to the Shipping Terminal Project contains invoices addressed to the State Organisation, which was presumably the owner of the project.

In support of the claim for storage costs in respect of the Baghdad Tower Clock Project, IMP inženiring provided invoices showing the costs it incurred to its suppliers and other agents, as well as payment instructions to its bank.

Elettra provided evidence that it had a contract with Snamprogetti, that it incurred costs in relation to its employee on the Lube-Oil Project and that it invoiced Snamprogetti for these amounts.

In respect of retention monies allegedly outstanding, the Panel finds that, although Niigata did not provide copies of any of the completion certificates pertaining to the project, the monthly invoices submitted by Niigata demonstrate that the project was almost 100 per cent complete at the time of Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

In support of its claim, Bangladesh Consortium provided a breakdown of the invoices issued in the 12 months from August 1989 to July 1990, a breakdown of each monthly invoice by project, financial statements for the year ending 31 December 1991, and a summary of contracts in progress as of 31 December 1992.

In support of the claim for unpaid monthly statements in respect of the Baghdad Tower Clock Project, IMP inženiring provided extensive evidence, including a copy of the contract dated 14 March 1989 with Al-Fao, letters from various suppliers stating that equipment could no longer be delivered to the project site and monthly invoices for work performed from May to September 1990.