Valores Mundiales v Venezuela - United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit No 23-7077 - Opinion - 8 December 2023
Country
Year
2023
Summary
Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge EDWARDS.
EDWARDS, Senior Circuit Judge: The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ("ICSID") was established in 1966 by a multilateral convention designed to promote international investment. ICSID aims to fulfill the goal of its generating convention by providing reliable dispute resolution processes for member states and nationals of other member states. However, ICSID is not authorized to enforce arbitration awards issued pursuant to its procedures. Rather, the parties to any such proceeding must rely on the courts of member states to enforce awards issued by an Arbitral Tribunal convened in accordance with the ICSID Convention. See ICSID Convention, art. 54, 17 U.S.T. 1270. Thus, as a signatory to the ICSID Convention, the United States has agreed that an ICSID award will "be given the same full faith and credit as if the award were a final judgment of a court of general jurisdiction of one of the several States." 22 U.S.C. § 1650a(a).
This case concerns a claim against Venezuela, a debtor subject to an ICSID arbitration award. In 2013, two Spanish companies, Valores Mundiales, S.L. and Consorcio Andino, S.L. (together, "Valores") commenced an arbitration under the ICSID Convention claiming that Venezuela forcibly occupied and decreed the expropriation of the assets of the two companies. An ICSID Arbitral Tribunal ruled in favor of Valores, ordering Venezuela to pay more than $430 million in compensation, plus attorneys' fees and costs. Venezuela then sought to annul the Arbitral Tribunal's award. Valores, in turn, filed an action to enforce the award in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The District Court stayed the enforcement action pending disposition of the ICSID annulment proceeding.
After the parties' briefs had been submitted in the annulment proceeding, the National Assembly of Venezuela ceased to recognize Nicolás Maduro as President and named Juan Guaidó as Interim President. Representatives for the Interim Government requested the ICSID Annulment Committee to allow it to replace the lawyers representing Venezuela in the annulment proceeding. After careful review of the matter, the ICSID Annulment Committee concluded that the lawyers who had been representing Venezuela should continue through the conclusion of the annulment proceeding.
The ICSID Annulment Committee ultimately rejected Venezuela's request to annul the Arbitral Tribunal's award and granted Valores the attorneys' fees incurred as a result of Venezuela's failed bid.
When the proceeding before the District Court resumed, Venezuela opposed enforcement of the judgments issued by the Arbitral Tribunal and the Annulment Committee. Venezuela claimed that it had been deprived of due process because the ICSID Annulment Committee had declined to recognize counsel designated by the Guaidó regime. Venezuela also argued that, because the United States had formally recognized the Guaidó regime, the District Court should not enforce the ICSID awards. Finally, Venezuela argued that Valores had forfeited any claim to fees awarded by the Annulment Committee.
The District Court found that no due process violations occurred in the ICSID proceedings. Valores Mundiales, S.L. v.
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, 2023 WL 3453633, at *5-6 (D.D.C. May 15, 2023). The court concluded that, under Section 1650a, if ICSID would treat the contested award as binding, a federal district court must as well. Id. at *5. The District Court explained that, "[u]nder both the ICSID Convention and the U.S. implementing legislation, a U.S. court is not permitted to examine an ICSID award's merits, its compliance with international law, or the ICSID tribunal's jurisdiction to render the award." Id. (internal quotation omitted). And the District Court also made it clear that, in enforcing the awards emanating from the ICSID proceedings, it was "not recognizing any regime as the current official government of Venezuela." Id. at *7. The court thus granted Valores's motion for summary judgment and allowed enforcement of fees and costs awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal and the Annulment Committee. Id. Venezuela then appealed to this court.
We find no merit in Venezuela's challenges to the District Court's decision. As we explain below, the District Court committed no error in construing the prescriptions of the ICSID Convention and applying the full faith and credit requirement of 22 U.S.C. § 1650a. We therefore affirm the summary judgment and awards of fees and costs issued by the District Court in favor of Valores.
...