Suchergebnisse

Petitioner, the Libyan National Oil Corp. (NOC), filed the petition to confirm an arbitral award rendered in Paris against Libyan Sun Oil Co. (LSOC), a Delaware corporation. The petition was based on the UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (Convention). LSOC opposed the petition on the grounds that NOC was not entitled to access to U.S. courts because of the state of relations between the United States and Libya and that the Libyan Sanctions Regulations prevented NOC from maintaining its claim in the absence of a license from the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. In addition, LSOC argued that confirmation of the award should be denied under various provisions of the Convention, including the "public policy" defense embodied in Article V(2)(b). The district court (per Latchum, J.) held that NOC had standing to bring the petitión and that the defenses set forth in the Convention were inapplicable. The award was thus confirmed.

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Limits of — Acts Performed in Foreign Territory — Acts Affecting Foreign Commerce — Extraterritorial Application of Anti-trust Laws — The Law of the United States of America.

Plaintiff Sheets sought sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure against defendants, the Yamaha Motor Co. Ltd. (Yamaha Japan) and its wholly owned American subsidiary, Yamaha Motors Corp., U.S.A. (Yamaha U.S.A.), for misconduct in discovery and frivolous insistence that service on the foreign parent be made in conformity with the Convention on Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, better known as the Hague Service Convention. Plaintiff had effected service under the Louisiana long-arm statute, which permitted service on the subsidiary as involuntary agent for the defendant parent company in an action arising out of business transacted or tortious conduct occurring in the state. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana initially awarded $25,000 in sanctions to the plaintiff. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit remanded the decision for further findings by the district court on the grounds for imposing sanctions. The district court held (per Schwartz, J.): in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, involving a state service statute virtually identical to that of Louisiana, the defendants' failure to waive service under the Hague Convention needlessly increased the cost of litigation and was properly the subject of Rule 11 sanctions.

States — Sovereignty and Independence — Contract between Government and a Private Party — Interpretation of — Whether Presumption in Favour of Government.War — Termination of — Cessation of Hostilities — Interpretation of a Contract Between a Government and a Private Party — Whether Presumption in Favour of the Government.

Plaintiffs, Sperry Corp. and Sperry World Trade Inc. (Sperry), received an award from the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (Tribunal). Upon payment of the award, the United States deducted 2 percent of the total amount pursuant to a directive license issued by the Secretary of the Treasury regarding recovered claims by U.S. nationals against Iran. When plaintiffs challenged the authority of the Treasury to make the deduction and the United States Claims Court announced a preliminary ruling that concurred with plaintiffs' position, the Executive persuaded Congress to approve legislation authorizing specified percentages to be deducted by the United States from Tribunal awards to U.S. citizens. Responding to the plaintiffs' challenge to the constitutionality of the newly enacted statute, the United States Claims Court dismissed the suit and, on appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (per Meyer, J.) reversed and held: that the deduction constitutes a taking without compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In September 1988, the United States filed notice of appeal with the Supreme Court.