Hidroelectrica Santa Rita S.A. (“HSR”) and Corporación AIC, S.A. (“AICA”) were parties to an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (“EPC”) contract for a power plant to be built in Guatemala. HSR canceled the project, citing force majeure, and the parties brought various claims against each other in arbitration. The arbitration panel issued an award which—among other…
Tag: International arbitration
A New Rule for Vacatur of International Arbitration Awards
Overruling Industrial Risk Insurers v. M.A.N. Gutehoffnunshutte GmbH, 141 F.3d 1434 (11th Cir. 1998) and Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. v. Del Monte International GmbH, 921 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2019), the Eleventh Circuit has held that an international arbitration award falling under the New York Convention may be vacated by courts in the…
Full Court Will Consider Grounds for Vacatur of International Arbitration Awards
The court will rehear en banc Corporacion AIC, SA v. Hidroelectrica Santa Rita S.A., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 27855 (11th Cir. Oct. 5, 2022), concerning the grounds for vacatur of an arbitration award falling under the New York Convention. As we reported here, a panel of the court affirmed a denial of a motion for…
Panel Invites Full Court to Revisit Grounds on Which International Arbitration Awards Can Be Vacated
In Corporacion AIC, SA v. Hidroelectrica Santa Rita S.A., 34 F.4th 1290 (11th Cir. 2022), a panel of the Eleventh Circuit urged the full court to reconsider its holding in Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. v. Del Monte International GmbH, 921 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2019), and to add to the grounds on which…
Party Seeking to Vacate International Arbitration Award Must Assert Ground Enumerated in Convention, Court Reaffirms
In Inversiones y Procesadora Tropical INPROTSA, S.A. v. Del Monte International GmbH, 2019 WL 1768911 (11th Cir. Apr. 23, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s order that denied INPROTSA’s petition to vacate an international arbitration award and confirmed that award. Concluding that INPROTSA was required to assert a valid defense under the Convention…
London or New York? Beware Inconsistent Dispute Resolution Provisions
Internaves de Mexico s.a. de C.V. v. Andromeda Steamship Corp., 2018 WL 3636427 (11th Cir. Aug. 1, 2018), demonstrates the perils (and costs) of inconsistency in an agreement’s dispute resolution provisions. Internaves and Andromeda were parties to a “charter party” agreement for the transportation of an electric transformer from Brazil to Mexico. The agreement, completed…