Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:45:23.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Second Circuit Refuses to Confirm International Arbitration Award Against Peru, Citing Forum Non Conveniens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration, Jan. 30, 1975, 14 ILM 336 (1975), available at http://www.oas.org/jundico/english/treaues/b-35.html.

2 Figueiredo Ferraz E Engenharia De Projeto Ltda. v. Peru, 665 F.3d 384 (2d Cir. 2011).

3 The operation of the Peruvian statute was not clear from the record, and the court did not purport to state it precisely.

4 9 U.S.C. §§1-16(2006).

5 Consultoria E Engenharia de Projeto Ltda. v. Republic of Peru, 655 F.Supp.2d 361 (S.D.N.Y. 2009).

6 Figueiredo Ferraz, 665 F.3d at 390. The dissent (and some outside observers) found this position unpersuasive, believing that forum non conveniens should not be available to contest an action intended to gain enforcement of an arbitral award against the losing party’s assets in the jurisdiction.

7 Id. at 391 (citations and footnotes omitted).

8 Id. at 392 (citations omitted).

9 Id. at 394 n. 11.

10 ld. at 394, 402-03 (Lynch, J., dissenting) (citations omitted).