The Government of Peru held two separate concessions, one for each terminal at the Port of Callao. The South Pier concession was held first and the North Pier concession was held years later. In this arbitration, the private company, which won the South Pier concession (the first concession), was citing their perceived unfairness of the situation saying that the winners of the North Pier concession received more advantages, and that, as a result, their South Pier profits were jeopardized. This arbitration was to dispute whether or not the Government of Peru was at fault and, if so, how much they owed the South Pier operators. The lawyers representing the Government of Peru retained Nathan Associates, and Dr. Paul Kent served as the expert witness for this arbitration.

Nathan prepared two reports to support the Government of Peru’s argument against the damages claim of the South Pier private operator. Our work supported the project’s overall objectives through our thorough research and informed economic understanding of the port market in Latin America and worldwide. Nathan conducted the following tasks:

• Reviewed available information/data, including port cargo and shipping data, port and terminal expansion and development plans;
• Completed a comparative analysis of tariffs between the Port of Callao and other ports in the region;
• Compared competition between the North and South piers to assess whether there were any advantages or disadvantages;
•  Analyzed the concession contracts;
•  Provided ongoing advice to the legal team regarding port technical issues.