New York International Law Review

  • Archive of Past Issues
  • About This Publication

    The New York International Law Review features peer-written substantive articles relating to the practice of international law on such topics as NAFTA, terrorist financing restrictions, the collection of money judgments outside the U.S., foreign direct investments, and trade agreements. Edited by Lester Nelson, Esq., with the assistance of St. John's University School of Law, the New York International Law Review is published twice per year by the International Section and distributed to Section Members free of charge.

    The New York International Law Review is published as a benefit for members of the International Section and is copyrighted by the New York State Bar Association. The copying, reselling, duplication, transferring, reproducing, reusing, retaining or reprinting of this publication is strictly prohibited without permission.
    © New York State Bar Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1050-9453 (print) ISSN 1933-849X (online)

    Reprint Permission

    Article Submission

    Citation Enhanced Version from Loislaw (Section members only)

    Disability Accommodations

  • Table of Contents Current Issue

    Winter 2014

    Articles

    Sovereign Immunity, Quo Vadis?
    Halil Rahman Basaran
     
    MOFCOM’s Review of Global Mergers and Acquisitions in China in Recent Years: Deals and Lessons
    Sabrina H. He, Fang Han

    Inconsistent Application: Enforcing International Arbitral Awards in National Courts
    Mia Levi

    Recent Decisions

    Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.
    The U.S. Supreme Court found that the Alien Tort Statute does not grant Nigerian human rights 
    victims the ability to bring their case in U.S. courts based on extraterritoriality.

    Starshinova v. Batratchenko
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D.N.Y. held that extraterritoriality barred Russian investors alleging fraud regarding investments sold to them outside the U.S. because neither the Securities Exchange Act nor the Commodities Exchange Act applied to investments that were not listed on a domestic stock exchange.
     
    Corporación Mexicana de Mantenimiento Integral v. PEMEX-Exploración y Producción

    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D.N.Y. held it had discretion to disregard a Mexican appellate court’s decision to vacate an arbitration award because the decision violated the basic notions of justice by applying a law not in effect when the parties contracted.
     
    Onrubia de Beeck v. Lopez Costa
    The Plaintiff’s claims for fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty against an Argentine therapist each presented a choice of law issue. The court applied an interest-analysis approach to decide which of three jurisdictions’ law should apply: New York’s, Argentina’s, or the British Virgin Islands’.

    Thai-Lao Lignite (Thailand) Co., Ltd. v. Laos
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D.N.Y. held that the stringent standard for the attachment of a sovereign’s property did not apply to discovery of the sovereign’s assets: discovery may be ordered broadly in order to enforce a valid judgment.
     
    Valentini v. Citigroup, Inc.
    The U.S.D.C. for the S.D.N.Y. granted Defendants’ motions for sanctions and security for costs in part and granted Defendants’ motion to amend their Answer, holding that Plaintiffs, a Brazilian company, were negligent in failing to comply with discovery orders.