The Real Significance of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements
The stated purpose of the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (“COCA”) is to “provide[] certainty and ensure[] the effectiveness of exclusive choice of court agreements between parties to commercial transactions.” The treaty seeks to achieve this goal in two primary ways. First, the courts in contracting states must enforce choice of court…
Continue ReadingSummer Schedule
July is here! And TLB is moving to a reduced schedule for a few weeks. We plan to limit our posts to just three or four times a week and to take Friday’s off (unless something really important happens). We plan to resume our regular publication schedule in mid-August.
Continue ReadingThrowback Thursday: The Legacy of Paxton Blair
Paxton Blair, a New York attorney practicing in the 1920s, has influenced American law to an extent most law professors can only dream of. His 1929 Columbia Law Review article, The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American Law, introduced the term “forum non conveniens” to the United States. (As he noted, only a few…
Continue ReadingWhen Should Federal Common Law Govern Transnational Litigation?
The conventional wisdom is that transnational litigation “can trigger foreign relations concerns.” Because the federal government has primary responsibility for the United States’ relations with other nations, the question naturally arises whether federal law should govern such litigation even when neither a federal statute, nor the U.S. Constitution, nor a treaty is applicable. Currently, as…
Continue ReadingWhen Terrorists Default, Should Courts Consider Personal Jurisdiction?
A case from last week, Kaplan v. Hezbollah, illustrates the intricacies of consent-based personal jurisdiction in the context of default judgments and raises questions about the due process rights of terrorist organizations (and other unpopular defendants). U.S. citizens injured by Hezbollah missile attacks in Israel sued under the Antiterrorism Act (ATA). Hezbollah did not enter…
Continue ReadingSection 230 and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality
The Ninth Circuit opinion in Gonzalez v. Google (2021) raises important questions about how the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to immunity defenses invoked by social media companies under 47 U.S.C. § 230.Section 230 shields internet companies from civil liability for user-generated content hosted on their platforms. Gonzalezholds, effectively, that there is no conceivable application of…
Continue ReadingHighlights from the Media Coverage of ZF Automotive
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd. has generated discussion, criticism, and approval in the transnational litigation and international arbitration communities. Writing for the Court, Justice Barrett relied on the meaning of the term “tribunal,” specifically when paired with “foreign” or “international,” to resolve a major circuit split and…
Continue ReadingThrowback Thursday: Canada, Cannabis, and Forum Selection Clauses
Companies engaged in transnational litigation prefer, as a rule, to litigate disputes at home. Litigating at home allows a party to rely on lawyers and procedures with which it is already familiar. It also forces the other party to bear the costs of litigating in an unfamiliar legal system and (sometimes) in a foreign language….
Continue ReadingA Primer on Human Rights Litigation
Modern human rights law developed in response to the events of the World War II, although it has earlier precursors. In 1948, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a non-binding declaration. More than seventy human rights treaties followed, including the Genocide Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,…
Continue ReadingZF Automotive: Closing a Door, Opening a Window
The Supreme Court’s decision in ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd. drew a bright line for a statute that is otherwise regulated almost entirely by judicial discretion. In a terse and unanimous opinion, Justice Barrett wrote that Section 1782 does not permit district courts to order discovery for use in private international arbitration. The…
Continue Reading