Argentina Ruling Doesn't Address Non-FSIA Discovery Limits

In its latest decision interpreting the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), the U.S. Supreme Court made clear that any claim of immunity by a foreign state must rise or fall based on the text of the FSIA. Because the FSIA does not spell out any immunity or special protections for foreign states that have already lost civil suits and are the target of post-judgment discovery, foreign states cannot rely on the FSIA to resist such discovery.

Facts of Argentina v. NML -

In 2001, in the midst of a severe economic downturn, Argentina defaulted on its debt obligations. NML Capital Ltd., a bondholder, sued Argentina for its unpaid debts in federal district court in New York. The FSIA did not shield Argentina from suit in federal court because the bond indenture agreement between Argentina and NML contained a broad waiver of Argentina’s immunities. NML prevailed in each of its 11 actions against Argentina, yielding judgments of $2.5 billion.

Originally published in Law360, New York on June 18, 2014.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Topics:  Argentina v NML Capital, Discovery, FSIA, SCOTUS, Sovereign Immunity

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, International Trade Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »