LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — A federal judge in Arkansas on Sept. 14 denied an insolvent e-waste recovery company's motion to set aside entry of default judgment confirming an arbitral award of nearly 5.7 million British pounds in damages and $1 million in costs against it, finding that the company did not present good cause for failing to submit a timely response (Tetronics [International] Limited v. BlueOak Arkansas LLC, No. 20-cv-530, E.D. Ark., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167254).
SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Sept. 14 heard arguments over whether Congress intended discovery for use in foreign proceedings to be allowed for a private arbitration, an issue that is currently the subject of a circuit split, and asked counsel if it can still resolve the appeal given that the original underlying arbitration in China has concluded and discovery is now sought for a new arbitral proceeding between the same parties (HRC-Hainan Holding Company, LLC, et al. v. Yihan Hu, et al., No. 20-15371, 9th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunal in an award issued Aug. 14 and released publicly on Sept. 4 denied two tire companies' nearly $20 million claim against the Republic of Panama after finding that there was not "a scintilla of evidence" showing that the companies' tire trademarks were harmed or lost value due to a Panama Supreme Court judgment against the companies (Bridgestone Licensing Services, Inc., et al. v. Republic of Panama, No. ARB/16/34, ICSID).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Sept. 8 denied a Chilean winery shareholder's application to stay proceedings to enforce an approximately $28.7 million arbitral award pending his filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari despite his arguments that the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred by remanding an award-valuation dispute to a district court rather than returning it to arbitration and that he would suffer irreversible harm if the case were not stayed (Juan Carlos Celestino Coderch Mitjans v. EGI-VSR, LLC, No. 20A38, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Lithuanian energy company on Aug. 31 filed in a District of Columbia federal court a petition to confirm an arbitral award of more than 2.9 million euros against the Republic of Latvia for violating a bilateral investment treaty and harming the company's investment in a district heating business in Latvia, asserting that Latvia's application for annulment was recently rejected and a stay on enforcement has been lifted (UAB E Energija v. Republic of Latvia, No. 20-cv-2426, D. D.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — After finding that Italy's changes to a solar power incentives program were not arbitrary or nontransparent and were made before an Italian entity controlled by Belgian shareholders began construction of solar power plants, an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunal in an award issued Sept. 4 and made public Sept. 8 denied the entity's 196 million euro claim against the Italian Republic alleging unfair treatment and expropriation of its investment (Eskosol S.p.A. in liquidazione v. Italian Republic, No. ARB/15/50, ICSID).
GEORGE TOWN, Cayman Islands — A Cayman Islands Court of Appeal panel on Aug. 11 found that a nearly 93 million Brazilian real award (approximately $16.6 million) for the fraudulent presale overpricing of shares in a Brazilian airline could be enforced, overturning a lower court's findings that the award was unenforceable because the tribunal had improperly applied the doctrine of iurit novit curia, but stayed enforcement pending an appeal in Brazil (Gol Linhas Aéreas SA v. Matlinpatterson Global Opportunities Partners [Cayman] II LP, et al., CICA 12-2019, Cayman Islands App.).
KOLKATA, India — A Calcutta High Court justice on Aug. 12 declined an Indian metal manufacturer's interlocutory application to enjoin arbitration in the United Kindgom of a dispute with a U.S.-based distributor regarding an alleged debt of $2.6 million in favor of arbitration in India after finding that Indian courts may grant injunctions halting foreign-seated arbitrations only under limited and "rare" circumstances while the present dispute falls under the parties' agreement that provides for arbitration before the International Commercial Court (ICC) in London (Balasore Alloys Limited v. Medima LLC, G.A. 871 of 2020 and 872 of 2020, Calcutta High).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Sept. 3 adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny a China-based joint venture's petition to stay arbitration with one of its members based in Ohio and granted the Ohio company's motion to compel arbitration after determining that federal law, not Chinese law, would apply to whether the parties' agreement to arbitrate is enforceable (SSI [Beijing] Company Ltd. v. Prosper Business Development Corporation, No. 18-8408, S.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161357).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A U.S. coal mining investor in an Aug. 14 submission to an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunal opposes Canada's request for bifurcation of a pending dispute regarding damages allegedly caused by Alberta's carbon emissions regulations, arguing that Canada's jurisdictional and admissibility objections "likely overlap with the merits" and involve "complicated factual issues" that cannot be resolved as a matter of law (Westmoreland Mining Holdings, LLC v. Government of Canada, No. UNCT/20/3, ICSID).
MIAMI — A federal judge in Florida on Aug. 25 denied a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction filed by the children of a deceased businessman who sought to enjoin their father's widow from selling off Colombian flower farms before an impending arbitration action against the widow, finding that the children failed to present facts showing immediate and irreparable harm (Peter David Ullrich, et al v. Clarisse Ullrich, et al., No. 20-23505, S.D. Fla., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154001).
CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — A federal judge in Texas on Aug. 31 granted a group of insurers' motions to compel arbitration of a Texas county's claims regarding payments for damages sustained during Hurricane Harvey and stayed the county's lawsuit pending arbitration, which the court found would be appropriate in light of the arbitration provision contained in the insurance policy and Fifth Circuit precedent (Nueces County, Texas v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London, et al., No. 20-65, S.D. Texas).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 28 surreply, Facebook Inc. asks a District of Columbia federal court to deny an application by the Republic of the Gambia for subpoenas for documents to be used in an International Court of Justice (ICJ) proceeding over purported genocide offenses by the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, arguing that the requested subpoena would violate the Stored Communications Act (SCA) (In re: Application Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 [The Republic of the Gambia v. Facebook Inc.], No. 20-mc-36, D. D.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three amicus curiae briefs filed Aug. 28 in the U.S. Supreme Court support a dental equipment distributor's arguments in its Aug. 21 petitioner brief that certain carveouts in arbitration agreements don't negate delegation agreements (Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc., No. 19-963, U.S. Sup.).
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Aug. 28 denied three Brazilian petroleum companies' petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc of the panel's recent opinion affirming a district court's confirmation of an approximately $615.6 million arbitral award against them for a deepwater drilling contract dispute that the oil companies had argued used the wrong standard of review and would create an intracircuit split (Vantage Deepwater Co., et al. v. Petrobras America Inc., et al., No. 19-20435, 5th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A British Virgin Islands-based engineering firm argues in its Aug. 26 opposition to the Federal Republic of Nigeria's motion to dismiss a petition to confirm an approximately $9 billion arbitral award that a District of Columbia federal court has jurisdiction over the matter and that based on comity and issue preclusion, the District Court should follow U.K. courts' previous decisions rejecting Nigeria's argument that an earlier liability award was set aside by a Nigeran court (Process and Industrial Developments Limited v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, et al., No. 18-594, D. D.C.).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Aug. 25 denied a motion for reconsideration of a discovery order filed by the targets of the discovery request who cited a Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision issued the same day as the court's order in arguing that "controlling law" had changed and would prohibit discovery for use in a Russian entity's arbitration against the Republic of Lithuania (In re the Application of the Fund for Protection of Investor Rights in Foreign States, No. 19-mc-401, S.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153808).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A District of Columbia federal judge on Aug. 24 granted a petition to confirm a $112 million arbitral award with interest against Ukraine for actions that deprived shareholders of their interests in a Ukrainian joint stock company that operates the nation's largest oil refinery after finding that Ukraine established no defense to recognition of the award under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (PAO Tatneft v. Ukraine, No. 17-582, D. D.C., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152856).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Republic of Nigeria on Aug. 12 moved to dismiss an action to enforce a $9 billion arbitral award against it in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for lack of jurisdiction, asserting that it is immune under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) because the liability award was set aside by a Nigerian court and is "a nullity" (Process and Industrial Developments Limited v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, et al., No. 18-594, D. D.C.).
HONG KONG — Citing a "material non-disclosure" by counsel for the applicants, a Hong Kong appellate court on June 3 set aside an ex parte enforcement order for a $9.3 million arbitral award issued in favor of two U.S.-based investment funds; the court wrote that the funds impermissibly made "a deliberate attempt to hide relevant material" from the lower court to more quickly obtain garnishee orders (1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC, et al. v. Global Industrial Investment Limited, No.  HKCFI 956, HCCT 61/2019, Hong Kong 1st Instance).