Immunity or Not? The English Court of Appeal Decides
In the United Kingdom, § 2 of the State Immunity Act 1978 (SIA) provides an exception to State immunity if a State has “submitted” to the jurisdiction of UK domestic courts. In a 2024 decision, the English Court of Appeal considered whether, under § 2 of the SIA, a State’s adoption of the Convention on the Settlement…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court Narrows the FSIA’s Expropriation Exception (Again)
(Editor’s Note: This article also appears in Just Security.) Last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Republic of Hungary v. Simon. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor held that commingling the proceeds of expropriated property with other government funds, which are then used for commercial activity in the United States, is not enough…
Continue ReadingInterpreting Choice-of-Law Clauses Waiving Sovereign Immunity
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides that a foreign state shall not be immune if it has “waived its immunity either explicitly or by implication.” Over the past forty years, U.S. courts have consistently held that a choice-of-law clause selecting the law of a U.S. state constitutes an implied waiver of foreign sovereign immunity. In…
Continue ReadingCC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp.: International Arbitration and Constitutional Avoidance
I suspect that CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd. caught the eye of the Supreme Court because of an interesting constitutional question: Does the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment apply in civil suits brought against foreign states in U.S. courts? More than thirty years ago, Justice Scalia, writing for a unanimous Court…
Continue ReadingRule 19 and Continuing Litigation in Peterson v. Bank Markazi
Last November, the Second Circuit decided in Peterson v. Bank Markazi that Bank Markazi, Iran’s Central Bank, remained immune from suit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA) despite the enactment of 22 U.S.C. § 8772, which subjects certain Iranian assets to “execution or attachment” to satisfy judgments against Iran. The district court will now…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court CVSGs in Terrorism Case
On January 13, 2025, the Supreme Court called for the views of the Solicitor General in Borochov v. Islamic Republic of Iran. (This is commonly known as a “CVSG.”) The question presented is whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s (FSIA) exception for state sponsors of terrorism, 28 U.S.C. § 1605A, extends to cases in which…
Continue ReadingAll I Want for Christmas (from the Supreme Court)
Following up on John Coyle’s post yesterday, I’ve prepared my own list of things I wish courts in the United States would do differently in transnational litigation. 1. Abandon the U.S.-Conduct Requirement for the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality The Supreme Court uses a presumption against extraterritoriality to determine the geographic scope of federal statutes. There have…
Continue ReadingCassirer Plaintiffs Ask Supreme Court to GVR
On Friday, the plaintiffs in Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation filed a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to grant, vacate, and remand (GVR) the Ninth Circuit’s decision in light of new California legislation mandating the application of California law to the merits of the case. It would be standard practice for the Court to…
Continue ReadingHungary v. Simon Offers Supreme Court Stark Choice
(Editor’s Note: This article also appears in Just Security.) On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Hungary v. Simon, a case brought by Holocaust survivors under the expropriation exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). In 1944, Hungary rounded up Jews and transported them by train to death camps, expropriating their property…
Continue ReadingDOJ Argues Against Turnover of Argentina’s Assets
On November 6, 2024, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York sent a letter to Judge Loretta A. Preska arguing against turnover of Argentina’s interests in YPF S.A., a state-owned energy company, to satisfy a breach of contract judgment. The $16.1 billion judgment in Petersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U. v. Argentine Republic arose…
Continue Reading