3rd Cir.: Venezuela-Owned Oil Company Not Immune From $1.2B Judgment Over Gold Deposits
A Venezuelan government-owned oil company has failed to shake a lawsuit that resulted in a $1.4 billion judgment against it over its expropriation of a Canadian company's gold deposits.
July 29, 2019 at 04:19 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
A Venezuelan government-owned oil company has failed to shake a lawsuit that resulted in a $1.4 billion judgment against it over its expropriation of a Canadian company's gold deposits.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Monday affirmed a Delaware federal judge's order allowing plaintiff Crystallex International Corp.'s collection efforts to move forward against Venezuela and Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., or PDVSA, a Venezuelan state-owned oil company.
In order to collect, Crystallex went after shares of PDVSA's U.S.-based subsidiary PDVH, which is a holding company of CITGO Petroleum, incorporated in Delaware. Venezuela argued that it was immune from the plaintiff's attachment lawsuit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
“Under federal common law first recognized by the Supreme Court in First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior de Cuba ('Bancec'),” Judge Thomas Ambro of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit wrote in the court's July 29 opinion, “a judgment creditor of a foreign sovereign may look to the sovereign's instrumentality for satisfaction when it is 'so extensively controlled by its owner that a relationship of principal and agent is created.'”
That was the case in this instance, Ambro said, despite Venezuela's assertions that the district judge misapplied Bancec. Ambro indicated that the Venezuelan government's control over PDVSA was absolute.
“Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, there is a strong presumption that a foreign sovereign and its instrumentalities are separate legal entities,” Ambro said. “But the Supreme Court made clear in Bancec and [Fed. Ins. Co. v. Richard I. Rubin & Co] that in extraordinary circumstances—including where a foreign sovereign exerts dominion over the instrumentality so extensive as to be beyond normal supervisory control—equity requires that we ignore the formal separateness of the two entities. This clears that bar easily. Indeed, if the relationship between Venezuela and PDVSA cannot satisfy the Supreme Court's extensive-control requirement, we know nothing that can.”
After Venezuela's 2011 nationalization of Crystallex's deposits in Las Cristinas, Crystallex invoked a bilateral investment treaty between Canada and Venezuela to file for arbitration before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Ambro said.
According to Ambro, “The deposits are among the world's largest. Per the contract, Crystallex spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing the Las Cristinas site.”
Crystallex won the arbitration, which took place in Washington, D.C. It was initially awarded $1.2 billion with interest, bringing the amount up to $1.4 billion.
Kent Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer in New York argued the case on behalf of Venezuela and did not respond to a request for comment. Miguel Estrada of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, D.C., argued the case on behalf of Crystallex and also did not respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
4 minute readLatham, Finnegan Win $115M Muscular Dystrophy Drug Patent Verdict for Counterclaimant
2 minute readDelaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250