Case of the Day: Strategic Technologies v. Procurement Bureau

The case of the day is Strategic Technologies Pte Ltd. v. Procurement Bureau of the Republic of China Ministry of National Defense, [2020] EWCA Civ. 1604. Strategic Technologies had a contract to supply goods to the Taiwanese government. The contract had an arbitration clause requiring arbitration in Taipei and was governed by Taiwan law. A dispute arose, and Strategic Technologies brought a lawsuit in Singapore. The government sought a stay pending arbitration, which the court granted, but then the government failed to arbitrate. As a result, the stay was lifted and the case went to a default judgment in 2002 (the lower court had held that by participating even to the limited extent of seeking a stay, the Taiwanese government had submitted to the jurisdiction of the Singaporean court). (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Strategic Technologies v. Procurement Bureau

Case of the Day: Servotronics v. Rolls-Royce

The case of the day is Servotronics, Inc. v. Rolls-Royce PLC (7th Cir. 2020). I wrote about a related Fourth Circuit case earlier this year. The case deepens the circuit split on whether Section 1782 reaches private foreign arbitrations. The Fourth and Sixth Circuits have recently said “yes.” The Second and Fifth Circuits had said “no.” Now the Seventh Circuit has taken the Second Circuit view, setting up a very strong candidate for Supreme Court review (assuming the arbitration will still be pending a year from now). (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Servotronics v. Rolls-Royce

Prince Andrew and the Epstein Case: Can the US Government Force The Prince to Cooperate?

In light of today’s news about a US request to the UK government seeking evidence from Prince Andrew, I am re-upping this post from January 2020.

Back in 2015 I wrote about some unserious attempts by lawyers for an alleged victim of Jeffrey Epstein to get testimony or a statement from Prince Andrew. I commented on the haplessness of the strategy of sending requests to Buckingham Palace and the awesomeness of the letterhead of the alleged victims’ lawyers. Later, I commented on a silly follow-up attempt to send official letters to the British Embassy. (more…)

Continue ReadingPrince Andrew and the Epstein Case: Can the US Government Force The Prince to Cooperate?

Royal Scandal of the Day: Can Prince Andrew Be Required To Testify?

Back in 2015 I wrote about some unserious attempts by lawyers for an alleged victim of Jeffrey Epstein to get testimony or a statement from Prince Andrew. I commented on the haplessness of the strategy of sending requests to Buckingham Palace and the awesomeness of the letterhead of the alleged victims’ lawyers. Later, I commented on a silly follow-up attempt to send official letters to the British Embassy. (more…)

Continue ReadingRoyal Scandal of the Day: Can Prince Andrew Be Required To Testify?

Belfast Project: Ivor Bell Acquitted

Ivor Bell, who was accused of soliciting the murder of Jean McConville, was acquitted last week in a Northern Ireland court after the judge directed a verdict in his favor. The charges against Bell had resulted from his taped confession, given to researchers at the Belfast Project, an oral history project about the Troubles that I’ve written about extensively over the years. The tapes were the subject of years of litigation after the Northern Ireland authorities requested legal assistance from the US government to obtain them from Boston College under the US/UK mutual legal assistance treaty. After the challenges to the subpoenas were finally, and in my view correctly, rejected and the tapes were produced, there were further challenges in the Northern Ireland courts to their use, which again were rejected, and thus the tapes were offered in evidence at Bell’s trial. But the judge excluded them from evidence, and as the confession was the only real evidence of guilt, decided that the jury could not convict. (more…)

Continue ReadingBelfast Project: Ivor Bell Acquitted

Case of the Day: Khrapunov v. Prosyankin

The case of the day is Khrapunov v. Prosyankin (9th Cir. 2019). Khrapunov was a defendant in an English lawsuit in which he was alleged to have misappropriated money from JSC BTA Bank, a Kazakh bank. He sought discovery from Google in the Northern District of California for use in the English case, and specifically for use in proceedings aimed at lifting injunctions the English court had issued. The judge, over objections, authorized issuance of the subpoena, and the objectors appealed. While the appeal was pending, the English court decided the injunction issue, denying Khrapunov any relief. Kharpunov’s requests for leave to appeal was denied, and the English court’s decision had become final, though he claimed he could seek to set aside the English decision. (more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Khrapunov v. Prosyankin