148. 为佐证其索赔，巴勒斯坦索赔人提交了以下证据：一份与科威特索赔人的“许可证租赁”协议的原件；日期为1989年2月、4月和5月的销售发票原件；供货商关于入侵前原材料采购的证明；一份1989年12月10日以该企业名义订立的火险保单复制件，有效期至1990年12月9日，投保设备和原材料。
In support of his claim, the Palestinian claimant submitted an original “rent-a-permit” agreement with the Kuwaiti claimant, original sales invoices dated February, April and May 1989, certificates from suppliers attesting to pre-invasion raw material purchases and a copy of a fire insurance policy in the name of the business issued 10 December 1989 and valid until 9 December 1990, insuring both equipment and raw materials.
149. 为佐证其索赔，科威特索赔人提交了以下证据：包括印刷厂在内的企业合并审计账目，截至日期为1989年12月31日和1990年8月1日；与巴勒斯坦索赔人所提交相同的保单复制件；一份企业房舍租金收据复制件，日期为1990年7月22日；一份科威特商会执照费收据复制件，日期为1990年4月18日；一份名字为科威特索赔人的续延企业执照的复制件，日期为1989年4月9日；数份设备更新的发票，日期为1993年5月；一份损失理算师的报告；两份证人证词。
In support of his claim the Kuwaiti claimant submitted consolidated audited accounts for his businesses including the printing business as at 31 December 1989 and 1 August 1990, a copy of the same insurance policy submitted by the Palestinian claimant, a copy of a rent receipt for business premises dated 22 July 1990, a copy of a receipt from the Kuwaiti Chamber of Commerce for licensing fees dated 18 April 1990, a copy of a renewed business licence in the Kuwaiti claimant's name dated 9 April 1989, copies of replacement invoices for equipment dated May 1993, a loss adjuster's report and two witness statements.
150. 在2004年12月对科威特的技术访问期间，同科威特索赔人和巴勒斯坦索赔人进行了面谈，请每一位索赔人就另一位索赔人的陈述和证据做出评论。
Both the Kuwaiti claimant and the Palestinian claimant were interviewed during the December 2004 technical mission to Kuwait and each claimant was asked to comment on the assertions and evidence submitted by the other.
在面谈中，巴勒斯坦索赔人就企业活动做出详细答复。
During the interview the Palestinian claimant provided detailed answers regarding the business activities.
相反，科威特索赔人仅能就企业活动做出一般说明，而且关于某些证据来源的说法前后不一。
In contrast, the Kuwaiti claimant was only able to provide general statements regarding the business activities and provided inconsistent statements regarding the origin of some of his evidence.
小组注意到，巴勒斯坦索赔人提供的证据为原件，而科威特索赔人仅提供了复制件。
The Panel notes that most of the evidence provided by the Palestinian claimant was original while the Kuwaiti claimant provided copies only.
151. 在考虑所有证据后，小组认为，巴勒斯坦索赔人证明了1990年8月2日前从科威特索赔人处租用带设备的印刷企业，建议仅赔偿其经证明的存货和利润损失。
Having considered all of the evidence, the Panel finds that the Palestinian claimant has established that he rented the equipped printing press business from the Kuwaiti claimant as at 2 August 1990 and recommends that he be compensated for his demonstrated stock and profit losses only.
C. 联合国赔偿委员会第3012936和第3012945号索赔
UNCC claims Nos. 3012936 and 3012945
152. 在第三组相抵触的索赔中，两位巴勒斯坦索赔人、一位科威特索赔人和一位约旦索赔人就科威特的一个照明设备企业集团损失在“D”类中提出了索赔。
In the third group of competing claims, two Palestinian claimants, a Kuwaiti claimant and a Jordanian claimant filed category “D” claims for the losses of a group of lighting businesses in Kuwait.
巴勒斯坦和约旦索赔人都提出他们在1990年8月2日前拥有该企业1/6的股权，而科威特索赔人则主张自己是企业的唯一所有人。
The Palestinian and Jordanian claimants each asserted a one-sixth interest in the businesses as at 2 August 1990 while the Kuwaiti claimant asserted that she was their sole owner.
153. 小组在第十批“D”类索赔中审查了该科威特人的索赔，建议就有关企业损失赔偿1,444,446美元。
The Panel reviewed the Kuwaiti claim in the tenth instalment of category “D” claims and recommended an award of USD 1,444,446 for business losses.
理事会核可了这项建议，并向科威特索赔人支付了赔偿金。
The Governing Council approved the recommendation and the award has been paid to the Kuwaiti claimant.
小组现在要处理的是巴勒斯坦索赔人的索赔。
The claim of the Palestinian claimant is now before the Panel.
154. 在对科威特和约旦的技术访问期间，同所有相抵触的索赔人进行了面谈。
All of the competing claimants were interviewed during the technical missions to Kuwait and Jordan.
155. 巴勒斯坦索赔人和约旦索赔人都说，在伊拉克入侵和占领科威特之前，其为该照明设备企业集团的合伙人，该科威特索赔人的丈夫是合伙人之一。
The Palestinian claimants and the Jordanian claimant each stated that they were partners in a lighting consortium prior to Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait and that the Kuwaiti claimant's husband was one of the partners.
他们说，1990年1月1日，包括巴勒斯坦索赔人、约旦索赔人和科威特索赔人的丈夫在内的6位合伙人与另外4位合伙人订立了一项新的合伙契约，扩大该照明设备企业伙伴关系。
They alleged that on 1 January 1990 six partners, including the Palestinian claimant, the Jordanian claimant and the Kuwaiti claimant's husband, entered into a new partnership agreement with four additional partners to expand the lighting partnership.
科威特解放后，6位合伙人从另外4位合伙人处购回股权。
After the liberation of Kuwait, the six partners bought out the interests of the four partners.
由于6位合伙人支付了首期出售付款，但没有支付最后付款，另外4位合伙人成功地对其起诉，要求最后付款。
As the six partners made the initial sale payment but not the final payment, the four partners successfully sued them for final payment.
在法院审理中，科威特索赔人仅被称为执照人，而其他伙伴—包括科威特索赔人的丈夫—被称为执照使用人。
In the court proceedings, the Kuwaiti claimant is referred to as the licence holder only while the partners, including the Kuwaiti claimant's husband, are referred to as the users of the licence.
156. 在面谈中，科威特索赔人及其丈夫说，其企业不同于非科威特索赔人索赔的、列入1990年合伙契约中的企业。
During her interview, the Kuwaiti claimant and her husband maintained that her businesses and those claimed for by the non-Kuwaiti claimants and included in the 1990 partnership agreement were distinct.
在对相抵触的索赔人提交的所有书面证据的审查中，小组未能找出支持这一主张的任何证据。
Upon review of all documents submitted by the competing claimants, the Panel was unable to find any evidence that supported this contention.
法院文件中提到的合伙契约由科威特索赔人的丈夫签署，其中具体提到了科威特索赔人在其索赔中索赔的企业。
The partnership agreement referenced in the court documents is signed by the Kuwaiti claimant's husband and specifically refers to the business that the Kuwaiti claimant claimed for in her claim.
157. 科威特索赔人还主张，她以这些单独和独特的照明企业所有人的身份，在科威特解放后，用360,000科威特第纳尔(6位合伙人各60,000科威特第纳尔)买下了该合伙照明设备企业的库存。
The Kuwaiti claimant also contended that in her capacity as the owner of these separate and distinct lighting businesses, she bought out the stock of the partnership lighting businesses after the liberation of Kuwait for KWD 360,000 (KWD 60,000 for each of the six partners).
小组请她提供银行记录，用单据证明相关时期这笔款额的提款或转账，但她却没有提供。
The Panel requested that she provide banking records documenting withdrawals or transfers of this magnitude in the relevant time period, however, she did not do so.