Seetransport Wiking Trader Schiffahrtsgesellschaft MBH & Co. v. Navimpex Centrala Navala
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
29 F.3d 79 (1994)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Seetransport Wiking Trader Schiffahrtsgesellschaft MBH (Seetransport) (plaintiff) was a German company that bought and operated boats. Navimpex Centrala Navala (Navimpex) (defendant) was a shipbuilding company operated by the Romanian government. Navimpex and Seetransport contracted for Navimpex to construct four ships for Seetransport. Disagreements arose between Seetransport and Navimpex, and the ships were not constructed. The matter was referred to arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in Paris, France. An arbitral award was issued by the ICC in favor of Seetransport. Navimpex petitioned the court of appeal in Paris to annul the French award, but the petition was dismissed. Seetransport later sued Navimpex in United States federal district court under the New York Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act (the act), because the statute of limitations on collecting the award under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the convention) had expired. The federal district court granted enforcement, and Navimpex appealed. Seetransport and Navimpex agreed that the French court’s dismissal of Navimpex’s petition to annul the award conferred exequatur on the award. Seetransport argued that in France exequatur qualified as a judgment allowing the prevailing party to collect on the award. Navimpex argued that exequatur was not equivalent to a French judgment and, therefore, there was no foreign money judgment for the federal district court to enforce under the act.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Newman, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.