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.
Singh Management Company, LLC v. Singh Development Company Inc., No. 18-1566 (6th Cir. May 20, 2019)
Court of appeals vacated the denial of a motion to clarify or amend judgment related to the confirmation of an arbitral award. Court found inconsistencies in the district court’s orders first confirming an arbitral award followed by a decision entering injunctive relief. Court held it was not possible to discern an explanation for these inconsistencies and vacated the denial motion remanding the case for further proceedings.
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel individual arbitration and stayed the case with respect to two plaintiffs, finding they manifested their assent to arbitration agreement electronically.
OI European Group B.V. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, No. 1:16-CV-01533-ABJ (D.D.C. May 21, 2019)
Court confirmed an arbitral award of more than US$ 400 million rendered under the auspices of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in favor of plaintiff. Court decided to enter judgment for the plaintiff noting defendant’s opposition pertained only to the applicable post-judgment interest rate.
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration, finding that there was a valid arbitration agreement and that plaintiff failed to establish the arbitration provision was substantially or procedurally unconscionable.
Constellium Rolled Products Ravenswood, LLC v. United Steel, Paper, and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, No. 2:18-CV-01404 (S.D.W. Va. May 20, 2019)
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to alter or amend judgment granting an injunction that prevented plaintiff from taken certain actions prior to arbitration, finding that court did not commit a clear error of law in its decision.