行使政府权力要求第1782条援助:这意味着什么?

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Gary J. Shaw, Michael Evan Jaffe, Lindsey M. Mitchell
{"title":"行使政府权力要求第1782条援助:这意味着什么?","authors":"Gary J. Shaw, Michael Evan Jaffe, Lindsey M. Mitchell","doi":"10.54648/joia2022036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On 13 June 2022, the Supreme Court published a highly anticipated decision in two consolidated cases that limited the availability of 28 USC § 1782. The Court ruled (1) that § 1782 was only available to arbitral tribunals exercising governmental (sovereign) authority; and (2) that neither private contract-based arbitral tribunals nor many investor-state arbitral tribunals meet the sovereign authority test. From a broad strokes perspective, the Court’s narrow reading of § 1782 resolved the split among the Courts of Appeals. The decision left open, however, important questions that will no doubt be the focus of future cases. This article will review the § 1782 cases that played out in the Courts of Appeals prior to the Supreme Court’s decision. The article will then examine the June 2022 decision and identify some of the questions left unanswered.\ninternational, commercial, arbitration, tribunal, evidence, 1782, comity, statute, circuit split, legislative history, supreme court","PeriodicalId":43527,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Arbitration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exercising Governmental Authority to Claim Section 1782 Assistance: What Does It Mean?\",\"authors\":\"Gary J. Shaw, Michael Evan Jaffe, Lindsey M. Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/joia2022036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On 13 June 2022, the Supreme Court published a highly anticipated decision in two consolidated cases that limited the availability of 28 USC § 1782. The Court ruled (1) that § 1782 was only available to arbitral tribunals exercising governmental (sovereign) authority; and (2) that neither private contract-based arbitral tribunals nor many investor-state arbitral tribunals meet the sovereign authority test. From a broad strokes perspective, the Court’s narrow reading of § 1782 resolved the split among the Courts of Appeals. The decision left open, however, important questions that will no doubt be the focus of future cases. This article will review the § 1782 cases that played out in the Courts of Appeals prior to the Supreme Court’s decision. The article will then examine the June 2022 decision and identify some of the questions left unanswered.\\ninternational, commercial, arbitration, tribunal, evidence, 1782, comity, statute, circuit split, legislative history, supreme court\",\"PeriodicalId\":43527,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Arbitration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Arbitration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/joia2022036\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Arbitration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/joia2022036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2022年6月13日,最高法院在两个合并案件中公布了一项备受期待的裁决,该裁决限制了《美国法典》第28条第1782条的可用性。法院裁定(1)§1782仅适用于行使政府(主权)权力的仲裁庭;以及(2)无论是基于私人合同的仲裁庭还是许多投资者-国家仲裁庭都不符合主权权威测试。从广义的角度来看,法院对§1782的狭义解读解决了上诉法院之间的分歧。然而,这一决定留下了悬而未决的重要问题,这些问题无疑将成为未来案件的焦点。本文将回顾最高法院作出裁决之前上诉法院审理的§1782案件。然后,文章将审查2022年6月的裁决,并确定一些未回答的问题。国际、商业、仲裁、法庭、证据、1782、礼让、法规、巡回法庭、立法历史、最高法院
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exercising Governmental Authority to Claim Section 1782 Assistance: What Does It Mean?
On 13 June 2022, the Supreme Court published a highly anticipated decision in two consolidated cases that limited the availability of 28 USC § 1782. The Court ruled (1) that § 1782 was only available to arbitral tribunals exercising governmental (sovereign) authority; and (2) that neither private contract-based arbitral tribunals nor many investor-state arbitral tribunals meet the sovereign authority test. From a broad strokes perspective, the Court’s narrow reading of § 1782 resolved the split among the Courts of Appeals. The decision left open, however, important questions that will no doubt be the focus of future cases. This article will review the § 1782 cases that played out in the Courts of Appeals prior to the Supreme Court’s decision. The article will then examine the June 2022 decision and identify some of the questions left unanswered. international, commercial, arbitration, tribunal, evidence, 1782, comity, statute, circuit split, legislative history, supreme court
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
50.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Since its 1984 launch, the Journal of International Arbitration has established itself as a thought provoking, ground breaking journal aimed at the specific requirements of those involved in international arbitration. Each issue contains in depth investigations of the most important current issues in international arbitration, focusing on business, investment, and economic disputes between private corporations, State controlled entities, and States. The new Notes and Current Developments sections contain concise and critical commentary on new developments. The journal’s worldwide coverage and bimonthly circulation give it even more immediacy as a forum for original thinking, penetrating analysis and lively discussion of international arbitration issues from around the globe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信