As we explain below, we are convinced that this case is ripe for interlocutory review. First, the resolution of whether the contractual period of limitation applies will "materially advance the termination of the litigation or clarify further proceedings therein . . . ." 7 GCA § 3108(b)(1); see also Guam Yun Shan Enters., Inc. v. Shenzhen Dev. Bank, Ltd., 1998 Guam 21, P3 (granting interlocutory review on a "summary judgment dismissal and denial of the motion for leave to amend" because "review of . . . [the] matter will serve to advance the termination of the litigation and clarify further proceedings."); Stenger Indus., Inc. v. Int'l Ins. Co., 74 B.R. 1017, 1019-20 (Ga. 1987) (granting interlocutory review in the determination of whether a limitations period applied and whether the trial court properly denied summary judgment).