The US IA Digest collects in one place important decisions on US international arbitration case law issued since January 1, 2016, compiled and organized into categories that are most relevant and useful to practitioners and other interested parties. The Digest will be updated on a rolling basis as new decisions are issued.
Newly Released Decisions
Royal White Cement, Inc. v. Weco Holli M/V, No. 23-CV-00788-BSL-DPC (E.D. La. Apr. 9, 2024)
Court granted in part motions to compel arbitration and to stay case pursuant to the New York Convention and denied in part motions to stay, insofar as they sought to stay the case in its entirety as to claims and parties not subject to the arbitration agreement.
Lam v. Rise Huge Corporation Ltd., No. 22-CV-06094-TLT (N.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2024)
Court dismissed action to uphold international arbitration award under the New York Convention for lack of personal jurisdiction where a Hong Kong defendant’s only contact with California was a contract for a one time stock purchase with a California defendant.
Urangesellschaft MBH v. Nynco Trading Ltd, No. 23-CV-07713-DEH (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 5, 2024)
Court granted motion to confirm ICC arbitration award rendered in Switzerland under the New York Convention, where respondent did not oppose the motion. Court awarded petitioner’s attorney’s fees and costs, and pre-judgment interest at a rate of nine percent, finding it was common practice within courts in the Second Circuit.
Wilson v. Carnival Corp., No. 23-10122 (11th Cir. Apr. 4, 2024)
Court of Appeals affirmed district’s court decision to dismiss plaintiff’s motion to vacate arbitration award with its legal seat in Panama, finding under the Panama Convention that only courts with primary jurisdiction, the legal seat of the arbitration, can vacate an arbitral award.
Bua International Limited v. Domtec International LLC., No. 23-CV-00206-DCN (D. Idaho Apr. 1, 2024)
Court denied petitioner’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs, finding that while the arbitrator ordered respondent to pay for petitioner’s costs of the arbitration, it did not award future costs such as attorneys’ fees incurred in confirming the award.
Seagen Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd., 22-CV-01613-JLR (W.D. Wash. Apr. 1, 2024)
Court denied plaintiff’s petition to vacate and granted defendant’s cross-motion to confirm arbitration award. Court found arbitrator plausibly interpreted the parties’ agreement and did not disregard the applicable law, nor act irrationally, where the arbitrator explicitly addressed, but denied, plaintiff’s claims.
St. James Parish School Board v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, No. 23-CV-06638-BSL-MBN (E.D. La. Apr. 1, 2024)
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stay litigation where all four factors of the New York Convention had been met: the parties entered into a written agreement to arbitrate, the agreement provides for arbitration in a New York Convention signatory nation, the agreement arises out of a commercial legal relationship, and the respondent is a non-American citizen and party to the arbitration agreement.
Anhui Light Industries International Co., Ltd. v. Dream Express Inc., 23-CV-05942-RGK-PD (C.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2024)
Court denied petition to confirm a CIETAC arbitration award under the New York Convention, finding respondent was not a party to the contracts, which were entered into fraudulently in respondent’s name, and therefore, did not consent to arbitration.