ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd
Issues
Does 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which authorizes federal district courts to order discovery “for use in a foreign or international tribunal,” apply to foreign or international private commercial arbitral tribunals?
This case asks the Supreme Court to decide whether a private commercial arbitral tribunal is a “foreign or international tribunal” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, a federal law that governs international judicial assistance. International judicial assistance refers to aid provided by one sovereign government to another in judicial proceedings. In ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd, Petitioner ZF Automotive US, Inc. contends that, based on the plain meaning and legislative history of § 1782, it does not apply to private commercial arbitral tribunals located in foreign nations. Respondent Luxshare, Ltd. counters that the dictionary definitions and legal use of the terms “foreign” and “tribunal” show that the statute does apply to private commercial arbitration. In AlixPartners, LLC v. Fund for Protection of Investor Rights in Foreign States, Petitioner AlixPartners, LLC argues that its arbitral panel does not qualify under § 1782 simply due to the international nature of the parties or the dispute because that does not turn the panel itself into an “international tribunal.” Respondent Fund for Protection of Investors’ Rights in Foreign States counters that the arbitral panel does constitute an international tribunal because it is resolving a dispute over whether one country violated its obligations under a treaty. These cases implicate the fair and efficient resolution of arbitral disputes, party autonomy, and international comity.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd.
Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which permits litigants to invoke the authority of United States courts to render assistance in gathering evidence for use in “a foreign or international tribunal,” encompasses private commercial arbitral tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th and 6th Circuits have held, or excludes such tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 2nd, 5th and 7th Circuits have held.
AlixPartners, LLC v. Fund for Protection of Investor Rights in Foreign States
Whether the phrase “international tribunal” in 28 U.S.C. § 1782 excludes an international arbitral tribunal constituted pursuant to a treaty signed by two sovereign States and charged with the authority to adjudicate with finality whether one of the two sovereigns breached its obligations under the treaty.
ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd.
The authors would like to thank Professor Maggie Gardner for her guidance and insights into this case.
Additional Resources
- Caroline Simson, Supreme Court Urged to Narrow Foreign Discovery Statute, Law360 (Feb. 2, 2022).
- Matthew Vadum, Supreme Court Blocks Order Compelling Company to Hand Over Documents to Chinese Manufacturer, NTD (Oct. 28, 2021).
- Timothy Blakely, Craig Celniker, Geary Choe, J. Alexander Lawrence, Daniel Levison, Sarah Thomas, International Arbitration Update: Supreme Court Takes Opportunity to Revisit Circuit Split over Discovery in Aid of International Arbitration, JDSupra (Dec. 17, 2021).