International Litigation & Arbitration Newsletter|March 2007|Volume 6 Issue 3|

International Litigation & Arbitration

 Newsletter

 North America
Baker & McKenzie

March 2007

Volume 6, Issue 3



In this Issue


Articles

Case Summaries

Contributors

 

 

View entire newsletter

 

 


Welcome to the March 2007 issue of the International Litigation and Arbitration Newsletter. This newsletter is an electronic bi-monthly publication distributed by Baker & McKenzie's North American Litigation Practice Group that provides summaries of recent decisions and other matters of interest in the area of international litigation and arbitration.

 

If you have any questions about the matters discussed below, or suggestions for improving the Newsletter, please forward any comments to us by clicking on one of our email links below.

 

Regards,

 

David Zaslowsky

Co-Editor

 

Grant Hanessian

Co-Editor

 


Article

Our featured article looks at some recent cases and their potential impact on using 28 USC Section 1782 to obtain discovery in aid of international arbitration. The article was written by Lawrence W. Newman and David Zaslowsky of our New York Office.

 

> Read More

 


Case Summaries


 

Anti-Suit Injunction. Southern District of New York enjoins party to arbitration agreement and its parent companies from participating in foreign litigation.

> Read More

 

Anti-Suit Injunction. Southern District of New York issues injunction barring foreign action to enjoin distribution of the amount collected in satisfaction of New York judgment.

> Read More

 

Attachment of Funds. Southern District of New York permits attachment of electronic funds Defendant claims were property of customers.

> Read More

 

Disclosure. Deposition by Video Conference. New York State Supreme Court grants motion for a protective order requiring Defendants to take the deposition of Plaintiff, residing in Morocco, by video conferencing where Plaintiff could not secure a visa to travel to New York.

> Read More

 

Discovery. Conflicts of Laws. Foreign Blocking Statutes. Southern District of New York authorizes discovery claimed to be blocked by Cayman Islands statute.

> Read More

 

Discovery. Foreign Blocking Statutes. Southern District of New York orders Defendant bank to disclose information located outside of the United States that was protected by foreign bank secrecy laws.

> Read More

 

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Entitlement to Non-Jury Trial. Seventh Circuit holds that compelling a sovereign to submit to jury trial does not constitute irreparable harm because of right to appeal and the remedy of a new trial.

> Read More

 

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Ninth Circuit holds that foreign state property must be used for commercial purposes in the United States to be subject to attachment.

> Read More

 

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Second Circuit finds that assets contained in the account of the Argentine central bank at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York were protected from attachment by the FSIA and commercial activity exception was inapplicable.

> Read More

 

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Second Circuit holds that financial supervisory organization is qualified as agent or instrumentality of foreign state and can claim sovereign immunity.

> Read More

 

Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. Southern District of New York holds that TRIA allows execution of judgment against designated terrorist state over blocked assets of its juridically separate agencies.

> Read More

 

Forum Non Conveniens. Supreme Court holds that federal courts do not have to establish jurisdiction before dismissing for forum non conveniens. 

> Read More

 

Forum Selection Clause. Seventh Circuit upholds forum selection clause requiring U.S. Plaintiff to sue in Japan in connection with U.S. joint venture.

> Read More

 

International Trade Law. Binational Panel System. D.C. Circuit finds lack of jurisdiction to hear a constitutional challenge to the binational panel review provisions of the United States-Canada Free-Trade Agreement Implementation Act of 1988 and the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act of 1993.

> Read More

 

Personal Jurisdiction. District of Massachusetts rules that case could not have been brought under Florida's Long-Arm Statute because German corporation did not have sufficient contacts with Florida and did not exercise sufficient control over separate corporation in order to establish specific or general jurisdiction.

> Read More

 

Personal Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens. Northern District of Illinois Bankruptcy Court exercises personal jurisdiction over foreign members of LLC, holding that the company's contacts with the forum were attributable to the foreign members.

> Read More

 

Personal Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens. Southern District of New York asserts personal jurisdiction and denies forum non conveniens motion where parties conducted business in New York.

> Read More

 

28 U.S.C. Section 1782. Discovery in aid of foreign proceedings permitted when an adjudicative proceeding is within "reasonable contemplation."

> Read More

 

28 U.S.C. Section 1782. Discovery in Aid of Foreign Proceedings. Northern District of Illinois holds that materials sought need not be discoverable or admissible in foreign tribunal to be discoverable under Section 1782.

> Read More

 

> Back to Top

 

List of Contributors

 

> Read More

 

 

Privacy Policy

 

This e-mail was sent by:
North American Litigation Practice Group
130 E. Randolph Drive
Chicago, IL 60601

Baker & McKenzie International is a Swiss Verein with member law firms around the world. In accordance with the common terminology used in professional service organizations, reference to a "partner" means a person who is a partner, or equivalent, in such a law firm. Similarly, reference to an "office" means an office of any such law firm.

This may qualify as "Attorney Advertising" requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.


Before you send e-mail to Baker & McKenzie, please be aware that your communications with us through this message will not create a lawyer-client relationship with us. Do not send us any information that you or anyone else considers to be confidential or secret unless we have first agreed to be your lawyers in that matter. Any information you send us before we agree to be your lawyers cannot be protected from disclosure.

If you wish to opt out of these communications, visit: http://bakerxchange.com/vtu/829068716161jnXZ599