Gesamtzahl der Seitenaufrufe

Samstag, 24. Mai 2014

(1) Whether this Court should certify to the New York Court of Appeals this question: Whether a foreign sovereign is in breach of a pari passu clause when it makes periodic interest payments on performing debt without also paying on its defaulted debt; and (2) whether a district court can enter an injunction coercing a foreign sovereign into paying money damages, without regard to whether payment would be made with assets that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act makes immune from “attachment arrest and execution,” 28 U.S.C. §§ 1609–1611.

Petitions for Conference of 06.12.2014


DocketCase PageIssue(s)CVSG
13-1080Department of Transportation v. Association of American RailroadsWhether Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which requires the Federal Railroad Administration and Amtrak to “jointly . . . develop” the metrics and standards for Amtrak’s performance that will be used in part to determine whether the Surface Transportation Board (STB) will investigate a freight railroad for failing to provide the preference for Amtrak’s passenger trains that is required by federal law, and provides for the STB to appoint an arbitrator if the FRA and Amtrak cannot agree on the metrics and standards within 180 days, effects an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to a private entity.N/A
13-1075U.S. v. JuneWhether the two-year time limit for filing an administrative claim with the appropriate federal agency under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b), is subject to equitable tolling.N/A
13-1074U.S. v. WongWhether the six-month time bar for filing suit in federal court under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b), is subject to equitable tolling.N/A
13-991Exchange Bondholder Group v. NML Capital, Ltd.(1) Whether, where a foreign nation has refused to make payments to holders of its defaulted debt instruments, a federal court can coerce payment by issuing an injunction preventing a non-party trustee from paying non-party holders of the sovereign’s non-defaulted debt instruments unless the sovereign also satisfies in full the claims of the defaulted debt holders, thereby imposing otherwise non-existent conditions on the payment rights of the non-parties and creating a grave risk of default; (2) whether the Fifth Amendment’s prohibitions against government deprivations and takings of private property solely for the purpose of conferring a private benefit bar a federal court from granting equitable relief that conditions the payment rights of the non-party, nondefaulted debt holders on the sovereign’s payment of overdue sums to parties who are holders of the defaulted debt; and (3) whether non-party holders of debt instruments have standing to appeal the district court’s entry of an order that prohibits payments on those specific debt instruments — and no others — until the debtor has satisfied unrelated overdue payments on other debt instruments.N/A
13-990Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd.(1) Whether this Court should certify to the New York Court of Appeals this question: Whether a foreign sovereign is in breach of a pari passu clause when it makes periodic interest payments on performing debt without also paying on its defaulted debt; and (2) whether a district court can enter an injunction coercing a foreign sovereign into paying money damages, without regard to whether payment would be made with assets that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act makes immune from “attachment arrest and execution,” 28 U.S.C. §§ 1609–1611.

1 Kommentar:

  1. Die Fragestellung zu (2) lässt leider nichts Gutes erwarten.

    AntwortenLöschen