Taking a step back, we have ongoing cases against them so non-payment on emergency rulings will look poorly on them - so logically they can't just do a runner.
If they do a runner
*, because lets face it they probably don't care about ICC cases and its just to drain our funds - I've mentioned before that ICC and ICSID have the power to intercept payments from most international banks and institutions. DLA just need to raise this point to the courts - and wouldn't you know it, if you don't pay according to ICC and ICSID, they don't really favour you going forward.
*This is a possibility for sure.... Refusing to pay is classic DRC, playing the victim, crying poor etc. but there is precedence for intercepting payments which is easy to argue.
For the way payments work, if the damages amount is high, they will draft the payment scheme. If its payment to the Arbitrator and legal teams, its a lump sum immediately, but won't go through AVZ, payable directly to DLA and ICC/ICSID.
We can even ask the courts to force securitization at the next hearings which puts a portion of the payable amount into escrow and will be paid upon a verdict. I'd say with the penalty ticking up to 100mil, we could ask for 20mil as security without much issue - then just work on the verdict and 20mil instant in the bank with the following 80mil that we have to chase up.
Obviously leaving it to DLA and BOD to decide, but that's my takeaway, and why i'm cool as a cucumber.
DYOR.