EXHIBIT R 2 Witness Statement of Mr

EXHIBIT R 2
Witness Statement of Mr. Daniel Grayson
My name is Daniel Grayson, born on 23 January 1972. I am currently the director of Rosen Ltd. I have been in charge of this position for 4 years, since 2011.
This was the first time Rosen Ltd contracted with Locus Ltd, even though Rosen Ltd has longstanding relationship with its parent company, i.e. Locus Group. However, there was a dispute between them arising from a contract for sale two years ago. As I know, the dispute was resolved by arbitration at Vienna International Arbitration Centre and Locus Group received an unfavorable award. Rosen Ltd has never intended to use any other arbitration institutions as Vienna International Arbitration Centre is our favorite and reliable choice for dispute resolution.
Ms. Emily Thorne, the director of Locus Ltd came to visit our company and proposed to buy 5,000 Phoenix Tulip seeds for her company’s promotion and sale to “help Locus Ltd gain access to international flower market” – as she said to me. We were willing to do that by allocating 3,000 seeds for Locus Ltd although it is our first initial contract.
Regarding the arbitration agreement under Article 10 of the Contract, Mr. Thorne was interested in a quick and saving-cost dispute resolution settlement. Then I noticed her that the arbitration agreement between Rosen Ltd and Locus Group would be used in our current contract of 20 August 2014.
The arbitration clause under the contract between Rosen and Locus Group is “All disputes arising from or in connection with the Contract shall be finally settled amicably and in good faith between the parties. If no agreement can be reached the dispute shall be decided by arbitration in Vinland, Lamia by the International Arbitration Tribunal of Vienna International Arbitration Centre (VIAC), under its Arbitration Rules in accordance with international practice. The number of arbitrators shall be three to be appointed in accordance with the Rules. The award shall be binding and each party shall comply with the award. This Contract is governed by the law of Alpha.” The only difference between the two arbitration clauses is that the full name of the arbitration institution is written fully, i.e. Vienna International Arbitration Centre. The arbitration clause under Article 10 of the Contract between CLAIMANT and RESPONDENT was an adoption of that clause, but omitted the name of Vienna International Arbitration Centre. I do not know who omitted the full name of the arbitration institution. Neither CLAIMANT nor RESPONDENT had any questions or discussions about the content of the arbitration clause during the negotiations or after the conclusion of the Contract. But I leave no doubt that Locus Ltd is well aware of the dispute between its parent company and our company in the past since Ms. Emily Thorne and I had a short conversation about it during our first negotiation.
Daniel Grayson Alpha, 14 September 2015