In Lavvan, Inc. v. Amyris, Inc., No. 21-1819 (2d Cir. Sept. 15, 2022),[1] the Second Circuit affirmed order denying motion to compel arbitration, holding that there was not clear and unmistakable evidence in the parties’ contract of an intent to arbitrate arbitrability and that the appellant’s claims were not subject to arbitration. Factual Background Plaintiff-Appellee Lavvan, Inc. (“Lavvan”) brought an action against Defendant-Appellant Amyris, Inc. (“Amyris”) in district court, claiming both trade secret misappropriation under the Defend Trade…
245 Park Member LLC v. HNA Grp. (Int’l) Co., 1:22-cv-5136-JGK (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2022)[1] Factual Background In 2017, Petitioner…
In Peace River Hydro Partners v. Petrowest Corp., the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) refused to stay a…
In Agrium v. Orbis Engineering Field Services, the Alberta Court of Appeal held that parties can appeal a decision from a master to a justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (now the Court of King’s Bench) despite section 7(6) of the Alberta Arbitration Act(“AA”). That section prescribes that “there is no appeal from the court’s decision under this section.” The case is significant because the Court of Appeal was divided and the majority…
Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC, v. Coverteam SAS (aka GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp.,), No. 17-10944 (11th Cir.…
Iraq Telecom Ltd. v. IBL Bank S.A.L., No. 21cv10940 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 8, 2022)[1] Factual Background In 2011, Iraq Telecom…
In In Re Romanzi; Kenneth A. Nathan v. Fieger & Fieger, P.C., Nos. 20-2278/21-1004 (Mich. Ct. App. Apr. 8, 2022), the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed that, where an arbitrators’ decision is challenged on brevity, the proper procedure is to remand the decision back to the arbitrators rather than vacate the award, and this action falls within the clarification-completion exception to functus officio.[1] Factual Background Attorney Craig Romanzi’s employment terms at Fieger & Fieger (“the…
Tethyan Copper Co. Pty Ltd. v. Islamic Republic of Pakistan, No. 1:19-cv-02424 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2022)[1] In 2006,…
The Supreme Court has issued only two decisions on Section 1782. In this Alert, we discuss the second…
Olin Holdings Ltd. v. State of Libya, No. 21-CV-4150 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2022)[1] In the 1990s, Libya made a number of legislative changes to foster foreign investment. This included entering into a number of Bilateral Investment Treaties, one of which was with Cyprus (the “BIT”). The BIT included a dispute resolution provision that allowed disputes between one of the countries and an investor from the other country to be submitted to a court where the…