largest amount of money collected after suing a foreign country

[Omega_Glory]

I was reading about a future Supreme Court case brought by Americans who’d been held hostage in Iraq the early 90s who wanted permission to sue the current Iraqi government for their treatment.

I got the impression that an individual winning a judgment against another country was more of a symbolic thing, and wondered if that was correct.

What’s the largest sum an American has collected after winning a lawsuit against a foreign country? Did the country just hand the money over, or did the U.S. government seize assets the country hadover here, and give them to the winner, or what?

[IAmNotSpartacus]

Libya settled claims related to the Lockerbie bombing, the article doesn’t cite a specific final amount but notes it could reach more than $1 billion.

[Omega_Glory]

Wow, that was fast. Thanks, NotSpartacus. That definitely shows that these suits can bring money and aren’t just about principles.

[Gfactor]

On the legal issues and some workarounds see:

RS22094.pdf

http://www3.law.nyu.edu/journals/lawreview/issues/vol77/no2/Gardenstein-Ross.pdf

http://www.jurist.org.cn/doc/uclaw200705/uclaw20070503.pdf

This is the largest judgment I’ve been able to find so far:

Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry of Industry (D.DC and DC Cir.). Lead counsel to US and European engineering firm in litigation against Iraqi ministry and banks and the US Office of Foreign Assets Control; obtained US$55 million punitive damage judgment on fraud claim against a foreign government agency, one of the largest in a Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act case.

http://www.arnoldporter.com/professionals.cfm?u=MarksRamonP&action=view&id=750

But you asked about collection–and I don’t have an answer on that.

[IAmNotSpartacus]

@Omega_Glory

Wow, that was fast. Thanks, NotSpartacus. That definitely shows that these suits can bring money and aren’t just about principles.

Yes, but let me qualify my link by stating that wasn’t a court judgment and the matter was settled out of court. I feel a bit sheepish after Gfactor’s lightning quick reply with an actual judgment.

I do wonder how one would go about enforcing a judgment like that.

[Gfactor]

@IAmNotSpartacus

I do wonder how one would go about enforcing a judgment like that.

Depends on the status of the other country. The Libya case was settled as a condition of removal of sanctions against Libya. There are a few exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act regarding attachment of property:

§ 1609. Immunity from attachment and execution of property of a foreign state

Subject to existing international agreements to which the United States is a party at the time of enactment of this Act the property in the United States of a foreign state shall be immune from attachment arrest and execution except as provided in sections 1610 and 1611 of this chapter.

§ 1610. Exceptions to the immunity from attachment or execution

(a) The property in the United States of a foreign state, as defined in section 1603(a) of this chapter, used for a commercial activity in the United States, shall not be immune from attachment in aid of execution, or from execution, upon a judgment entered by a court of the United States or of a State after the effective date of this Act, if –

(1) the foreign state has waived its immunity from attachment in aid of execution or from execution either explicitly or by implication, notwithstanding any withdrawal of the waiver the foreign state may purport to effect except in accordance with the terms of the waiver, or

(2) the property is or was used for the commercial activity upon which the claim is based, or

(3) the execution relates to a judgment establishing rights in property which has been taken in violation of international law or which has been exchanged for property taken in violation of international law, or

(4) the execution relates to a judgment establishing rights in property --

    (A) which is acquired by succession or gift, or

    (B) which is immovable and situated in the United States: Provided, That such property is not used for purposes of maintaining a diplomatic or consular mission or the residence of the Chief of such mission, or 

(5) the property consists of any contractual obligation or any proceeds from such a contractual obligation to indemnify or hold harmless the foreign state or its employees under a policy of automobile or other liability or casualty insurance covering the claim which merged into the judgment, or

(6) the judgment is based on an order confirming an arbitral award rendered against the foreign state, provided that attachment in aid of execution, or execution, would not be inconsistent with any provision in the arbitral agreement.

(b) In addition to subsection (a), any property in the United States of an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state engaged in commercial activity in the United States shall not be immune from attachment in aid of execution, or from execution, upon a judgment entered by a court of the United States or of a State after the effective date of this Act, if –

(1) the agency or instrumentality has waived its immunity from attachment in aid of execution or from execution either explicitly or implicitly, notwithstanding any withdrawal of the waiver the agency or instrumentality may purport to effect except in accordance with the terms of the waiver, or

(2) the judgment relates to a claim for which the agency or instrumentality is not immune by virtue of section 1605(a)(2), (3), or (5), or 1605(b) of this chapter, regardless of whether the property is or was used for the activity upon which the claim is based.

(c) No attachment or execution referred to in subsections (a) and (b) of this section shall be permitted until the court has ordered such attachment and execution after having determined that a reasonable period of time has elapsed following the entry of judgment and the giving of any notice required under section 1608(e) of this chapter.

(d) The property of a foreign state, as defined in section 1603(a) of this chapter, used for acommercial activity in the United States, shall not be immune from attachment prior to the entry of judgment in any action brought in a court of the United States or of a State, or prior to the elapse of the period of time provided in subsection (c) of this section, if –

(1) the foreign state has explicitly waived its immunity from attachment prior to judgment, notwithstanding any withdrawal of the waiver the foreign state may purport to effect except in accordance with the terms of the waiver, and

(2) the purpose of the attachment is to secure satisfaction of a judgment that has been or may ultimately be entered against the foreign state, and not to obtain jurisdiction.

(e) The vessels of a foreign state shall not be immune from arrest in rem, interlocutory sale, and execution in actions brought to foreclose a preferred mortgage as provided in section 1605(d).

§ 1611. Certain types of property immune from execution

(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1610 of this chapter, the property of those organizations designated by the President as being entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions, and immunities provided by the International Organizations Immunities Act shall not be subject to attachment or any other judicial process impeding the disbursement of funds to, or on the order of, a foreign state as the result of an action brought in the courts of the United States or of the States.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1610 of this chapter, the property of a foreign state shall be immune from attachment and from execution, if –

(1) the property is that of a foreign central bank or monetary authority held for its own account, unless such bank or authority, or its parent foreign government, has explicitly waived its immunity from attachment in aid of execution, or from execution, notwithstanding any withdrawal of the waiver which the bank, authority or government may purport to effect except in accordance with the terms of the waiver; or

(2) the property is, or is intended to be, used in connection with a military activity and

    (A) is of a military character, or

    (B) is under the control of a military authority or defense agency. 

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/ddcaron/Documents/RPID%20Documents/rp04039.html

Some other methods of “collection” are discussed in the materials I cited in my previous post.

[Omega_Glory]

Thanks for all the links.