1. "FOR USE IN A FOREIGN OR INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL": ZF AUTOMOTIVE SETTLES THE DEBATE OVER WHO CAN USE 28 U.S.C. § 1782 TO REQUEST DISCOVERY ASSISTANCE IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS.
- Author
-
HUNT, KAREN
- Subjects
INTERNATIONAL arbitration ,TREATIES ,STATUTORY interpretation ,INTERNATIONAL courts ,ADMINISTRATIVE procedure - Abstract
In deciding ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. v. Luxshare, Ltd. ("ZF Automotive") (June 13, 2022), the United States Supreme Court sought to determine whether either a private international arbitration or a semi-private investor-state arbitration was a "tribunal" for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 ("§ 1782"), in particular section (a)--a provision which authorizes a district court to order the production of evidence "for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal." This Note will comprehensively review the statutory history of § 1782, canvas the circuit split on defining a "proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal," and cover the Supreme Court's most recent ruling on § 1782 in ZF Automotive. This Note will further analyze the effects of the decision, identify this author's understanding of both of the new and revised applicable tests for determining a body's qualification as a "foreign or international tribunal" that is "imbued with governmental authority," and survey the few cases addressing this question in the post-ZF Automotive landscape. The statute has a long history dating back to 1855 and underwent significant changes in 1964. Following amendments made in 1964, there has been a question as to what constitutes a "foreign or international tribunal" under the statute. Before deciding this case, five federal circuit courts were split on the issue, with the Fourth and Sixth arguing that a private arbitration tribunal was a "tribunal" for the purposes of the statute, and the Second, Fifth, and Seventh arguing that it was not. To resolve this split, the U.S. Supreme Court consolidated and granted certiorari to ZF Automotive from the Sixth Circuit, and AlixPartners, LLP, et al. v. The Fund for Protection of Investor Rights in Foreign States ("AlixPartners") from the Second Circuit. In ZF Automotive, the tribunal at issue was a private dispute-resolution organization resolving a dispute between two corporations. In AlixPartners, the tribunal was an ad hoc arbitration panel resolving a dispute between a sovereign state and a private party as outlined in an international treaty. The Court held in a 9--0 ruling that only a governmental or intergovernmental adjudicative body constitutes a "foreign or international tribunal" under 28 U. S. C. § 1782, and that both bodies at issue in these cases did not qualify. According to the Court, for the purposes of § 1782, the inquiry is whether the features of the adjudicatory body and other evidence establish the intent of the relevant nations to imbue the body in question with governmental authority. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in ZF Automotive did much to clarify not only the meaning of the statutory term "foreign or international tribunal" but also subtly clarify the entire statutory analysis of § 1782 applications. First, the Court analyzes the statutory factors. The "For Use" factor now has two clearly defined tests available to discern whether a body is both a tribunal to begin with (the Intel Functional test) and whether it is a "foreign or international tribunal" intended to be imbued with governmental authority (the "Governmental Intended Authority Test" with the Guo Tribunal Character Factors). Then, only if the statutory requirements of § 1782 are met should the court apply Intel's Discretionary test when exercising its discretion in granting or denying the § 1782 application for discovery. While the door is now closed to private arbitrations, there is sure to be continued debate on § 1782's application to investor-state and other "public" arbitrations, but these clarified and categorized tests should help to properly focus the debate until the U.S. Supreme Court offers more guidance, hopefully in less time than transpired between their decisions in Intel and ZF Automotive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024