PULP MILLS (JUDGMENT) 47 Court under Article 60 of the 1975 Statute, which remains confined to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Statute. * * III. THE ALLEGED BREACH OF PROCEDURAL OBLIGATIONS 67. The Application filed by Argentina on 4 May 2006 concerns the alleged breach by Uruguay of both procedural and substantive obligations laid down in the 1975 Statute. The Court will start by considering the alleged breach of procedural obligations under Articles 7 to 12 of the 1975 Statute, in relation to the (CMB) ENCE and Orion (Botnia) mill projects and the facilities associated with the latter, on the left bank of the River Uruguay near the city of Fray Bentos. 68. Argentina takes the view that the procedural obligations were intrinsically linked to the substantive obligations laid down by the 1975 Statute, and that a breach of the former entailed a breach of the latter. With regard to the procedural obligations, these are said by Argentina to constitute an integrated and indivisible whole in which CARU, as an organization, plays an essential role. Consequently, according to Argentina, Uruguay could not invoke other procedural arrangements so as to derogate from the procedural obligations laid down by the 1975 Statute, except by mutual consent. 69. Argentina argues that, at the end of the procedural mechanism provided for by the 1975 Statute, and in the absence of agreement between the Parties, the latter have no choice but to submit the matter to the Court under the terms of Articles 12 and 60 of the Statute, with Uruguay being unable to proceed with the construction of the planned mills until the Court has delivered its Judgment. 70. Following the lines of the argument put forward by the Applicant, the Court will examine in turn the following four points : the links between the procedural obligations and the substantive obligations (A) ; the procedural obligations and their interrelation with each other (B) ; whether the Parties agreed to derogate from the procedural obligations set out in the 1975 Statute (C) ; and Uruguay’s obligations at the end of the negotiation period (D). A. The Links between the Procedural Obligations and the Substantive Obligations 71. Argentina maintains that the procedural provisions laid down in Articles 7 to 12 of the 1975 Statute are aimed at ensuring “the optimum 37