Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
2011INTERNATIONALARBITRATIONREPORT6IntelInreRozTrading.InreApplicationofHallmarkCapital.IntelLaComisinEjecutivaHidroelctricadelRioLempav.ElPasoIntelElPasoCorporationv.LaComisinEjecutivadelRioLempaexparteComisinEjecutivaHidroelctricadelRioLempav.NejapaPowerCompany1FulbrightJaworskiL.L.P.successfullydefendedtheThirdCircuitcaseandappearedasamicusontheprevailingsideoftheFifthCircuitcase.Both1782actionsarosefromthesameinternationalarbitrationinwhichFulbrightrepresentedtheclaimantCrudeInreApplicationofChevronCrudeexparteSeeInreChevronCorp.Chevronv.EcuadorRecentCasesandItsEffects1t1782discoveryforuseeveninprivatei.e.non-treatyinternationalarbitrationsbasedonsreferencetothe1965academicarticle.469F.Supp.2d1221N.D.Ga.2006534F.Supp.2d951D.Minn.2007.Othercourtsresistedthetrendholdingthatdidnotrulethatprivateinternationaltribunalsarewithintheambitof1782.617F.Supp.2d481S.D.Tex.2008.AttheappellatelevelapaneloftheFifthCircuitCourtofAppealsre-stateditspre-holdingthat1782doesnotapplytodiscoverysoughtforuseinprivateinternationalarbitrations.2009U.S.LEXIS175965thCir.Aug.62009unpublished.InarelatedcasetheThirdCircuitdismissedasmoota1782applicationwhichhadbeengrantedattheDistrictCourtlevelbecausetheevidentiaryphaseintheunderlyingarbitrationhadconcludedwithoutdecidingtheissueofthescopeof1782.2009WL23586943dCir.Aug.32009.TheprotractedlitigationbetweenChevronandEcuadorwhichspansalmosttwodecadeshasprovidedanumberofrecent1782decisions.TheunderlyingdisputerevolvesaroundtheallegedcontaminationbyTexacowhichbecameasubsidiaryofChevronin2001ofpartsoftheEcuadoranAmazon.ThelitigationhasinvolvedmultipleproceedingsinU.S.courtscivilandcriminalcasesinEcuadorancourtsagainstChevronanditsrepresentativesEcuadoranlitigationaswellasanUNCITRALarbitrationinitiatedbyChevronundertheU.S.-EcuadorbilateralinvestmenttreatyBITarbitration.IntheBITarbitrationChevronallegesthatthegovernmentofEcuadorhasabusedthecriminaljusticesysteminconnectionwiththeEcuadoranlitigation.Chevronseeksamongotherthingsadeclarationthatithasnoliabilityorresponsibilityforanyallegedenvironmentalimpact.ThecasehasattractedwidepublicityrecentlyfollowingaccusationsoffraudallegedcorruptionandbribesofEcuadoranjudgesthe2009releaseofafilmabouttheallegedenvironmentaldamageandamulti-billiondollarjudgmentissuedagainstChevroninEcuador.SeveralU.S.courtshaveweighedinon1782relatedaspectsoftheChevron-Ecuadordispute.In709F.Supp.2d283S.D.N.Y.2010Chevronsoughttoobtaintheouttakesfromallegingthattheycontainedrevealinginformationabouttheplaintiffslegalstrategyincludingallegedmeetingswithacourt-appointedexpertmeanttobeneutralandindependent.Thecourtorderedthelmsproducertoturnoverapproximately600hoursofrawfootageandsubsequentlyorderedthedepositionofoneoftheEcuadoranplaintiffsattorneys.2010U.S.Dist.LEXIS125432S.D.N.Y.Nov.292010.Chevronbroughtthe1782requestinconnectionwithboththeEcuadoranlitigationandtheBITarbitration.TheRespondentsdidnotobjecttotheEcuadoranlitigationbeingcoveredby1782buttheydidchallengethestatutesapplicationtointernationalarbitration.Thedistrictcourtnotedthatasaninitialmatter