'1. The Sole Arbitrator has received Claimant's Request for Arbitration and Respondent's "Mémoire en Réponse", together with the various attachments thereto, as well as the correspondence exchanged with the Secretariat of the International Chamber of Commerce ("ICC") prior to the appointment of the Arbitrator.

2. Because the Parties were not in agreement as to the language of arbitration, the Arbitrator, by letter dated May 14, 2004, invited the Parties to submit brief remarks in support of their respective positions as to the proper language of arbitration and their and their client's respective English and French language abilities. Pursuant to such request, the Arbitrator has received Claimant's letters dated May 24 and May 26, 2004 and Respondent's letter dated May 24, 2004.

3, In reaching a decision on the language of the arbitration, the Arbitrator has considered the following.

4. Article 16 of the 1998 ICC Rules of Arbitration (the "ICC Rules") provides:

In the absence of an agreement by the parties, the Arbitral Tribunal shall determine the language or languages of the arbitration, due regard being given to all relevant circumstances, including the language of the contract. (Emphasis added)

5. In comparison to the former 1988 ICC Rules of Arbitration, namely Article 15(3), Article 16 of the ICC Rules de-emphasized the role of the language of the contract in determining the language of the arbitration, However, as the language of the contract is the only circumstance expressly mentioned in the ICC Rules, it is intended to remain an important factor for consideration by a tribunal when making its decision. See, generally, Yves Derains and Eric Schwartz, A Guide to the New ICC Rules of Arbitration 1998 (1998), at 214-216.

6. Nonetheless, arbitral tribunals are encouraged to consider other circumstances in deciding on the language of arbitration, such as the language of written communications between the parties during the life of the contract, or the language of the documentary evidence and whether the parties, their counsel, and the tribunal are fluent in that language. Id. See also W. Laurence Craig, William W. Park, and Jan Paulsson, International Chamber of Commerce Arbitration (2000), at 96-97.

7. The Arbitrator has considered the following relevant circumstances:

(i) The language of the contract is English.

(ii) The Parties' correspondence exchanged during the life of the contract was in English.

(iii) Neither the Claimant nor its counsel is fluent in French.

8. Accordingly, the Arbitrator holds that the language of arbitration shall be English.

9. As Claimant has represented to the Arbitrator that neither it nor its client is fluent in French, conducting a bilingual arbitration, as suggested by Respondent, whereby Respondent would be permitted to file evidence and legal authorities in French as well as to have witnesses testify in French without arranging for translation thereof, is not feasible. Accordingly, if any Party produces a document or a witness who expresses himself in a language other than English, such Party shall provide an English translation of the document or testimony, at such Party's cost (pending, of course, the final award on costs).

10. Translations of documents from French into English may be free translations (that is, not sworn or certified translations). Translations of documents from a language other than French into English shall be sworn translations.

11. To date, if any Party has submitted documents in this arbitration in a language other than English, such Party shall provide an English translation of said documents at such Party's cost by June 11, 2004. If Claimant has already translated Respondent's "Mémoire en Réponse" and/or any other correspondence submitted in this arbitration to date into English, Claimant shall advise the Arbitrator and produce such translation(s) by June 4, 2004, so as to avoid any duplicative translation(s).'