Friday, February 15, 2013
Republic Of Ecuador v. Chevron
Feb 13: In   the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Case Nos. 12-20122, consolidated with 12-20123. Appealed from the United States District Court for   the Southern District of Texas.   The Republic of Ecuador (Appellant) seeks discovery from Appellees John   Connor and GSI Environmental, his   company, for use in a foreign arbitration against   Chevron. During   the course of extended litigation with Ecuador, Chevron, an   intervenor in the district court, has benefitted repeatedly by arguing against Ecuador and others that the arbitration is   a "foreign or international tribunal." Because Chevron's   previous positions are inconsistent with its current   argument, judicial estoppel is appropriate to make discovery   under § 1782 available to Ecuador. The Appeals Court reversed the decision of   the district court and remanded the case "for determination   of the scope of discovery."                              
    By   was of background the Appeals Court explains, Chevron, as successor to Texaco, became embroiled in litigation over the   alleged environmental contamination of   oil fields in Ecuador. The litigation spans nearly two   decades and dozens of courts. A court in Lago Agrio, Ecuador finally issued a multi-billion dollar judgment   against Chevron. Chevron filed for arbitration   under the rules, as allowed by the US-Ecuador   Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). Chevron charged that   miscarriages of justice in the Ecuadorian courts and participation by Ecuador in   the plaintiffs' fraud violated its rights. Ecuador applied to the district court   for ancillary discovery from Appellees for use in the arbitration and Chevron   intervened to protect its interests. 
      According to   the Appeals Court, the district court, felt compelled by prior Fifth Circuit decisions to deny Ecuador's discovery request. Following   those cases, the court concluded, the BIT arbitration   represents a bilateral investment dispute that is not   pending in a "foreign or international tribunal" as the statute requires. 
      The Appeals   Court concludes, "Chevron has deliberately taken inconsistent positions on the availability of § 1782 discovery for   use in 'international tribunals.' Chevron successfully   obtained such discovery by persuading courts to reject   Ecuadorian (and related parties') objections and by contending, opposite to its current position, that the BIT arbitration is   an 'international tribunal.' Finally, if Chevron is   permitted to shield itself under Biedermann against Ecuador's current discovery   request, it will have gained an unfair advantage over its   adversary. Chevron should be judicially estopped from asserting its legally contrary position here. Consequently, we need not   and do not opine on whether the BIT arbitration is in an   'international tribunal.' On remand, the district court   should proceed in its discretion to evaluate Ecuador's request for discovery pursuant to §   1782."
        Access the complete opinion (click   here). [#Remed, #CA5]
  GET THE REST OF TODAY'S   NEWS
  You can   review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click   here)
Access subscription information (click here)Want to know more about   WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).
  33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental   Professionals
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
 












 
 Posts
Posts
 
 


No comments:
Post a Comment