Crowell & Moring’s International Litigation team has represented private parties, sovereign governments, and state-owned enterprises in cross-border and international commercial, tort, and wrongful death cases. Our attorneys have developed perspective and expertise litigating international disputes in judicial forums across the United States and Europe. We understand and possess the unique skills necessary to litigate successfully a complex, multi-issue, multi-lingual, multi-jurisdictional litigation in the U.S. courts and abroad.
Our expertise covers all aspects of international and cross-border litigation, including:
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)
We are the premier firm for litigating FSIA cases in the United States, and have developed and leveraged close working relationships with United States Government agencies such as the National Security Council and the Departments of State, Defense, Commerce, and Justice to promote our clients’ interests. Through our experience, representing both foreign sovereign defendants in the United States courts and individuals and corporations pursuing suits against foreign sovereigns and state owned enterprises, we have helped shape the U.S. courts’ interpretation of the FSIA.
Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA)
Crowell & Moring has experience litigating cases involving the ATCA from both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s perspective. The Firm has successfully defended U.S. Government officials against ATCA claims brought by foreign plaintiffs, and the Firm has utilized the ATCA as a jurisdictional tool on behalf of foreign plaintiffs in U.S. courts.
International Terrorism Litigation
Our internationally renowned terrorism-litigation team has represented clients ranging from former hostages held in Lebanon in the 1980s to victims of embassy bombings and aircraft sabotage around the world. Terrorism proceedings involve complex application of, inter alia, the FSIA, the Federal Tort Claims Act, the Alien Tort Claims Act, the Torture Victims Protection Act of 1991, the Export Administration Act of 1979, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, and the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 2000. We have utilized our experience with these statutes to obtain some of the largest damages awards in U.S. history resulting from international terrorism. In fact, Crowell & Moring was awarded the largest judgment in a contested terrorism case, against the Government of Libya, arising out of the 1989 bombing of a jumbo jet over the Sahara Desert, killing 170 passengers and crew. The Firm also played a substantial role in the enactment of the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 2000, which led to the payment of numerous compensatory damages judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Discovery Strategies in International Litigation
Crowell & Moring has pioneered the use of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which grants U.S. courts discretion to order discovery to parties engaged in international disputes. In Roz Trading, the Firm won a groundbreaking federal court ruling that § 1782 can be utilized to obtain discovery in private commercial arbitrations abroad. We also have substantial expertise in obtaining foreign discovery for use in U.S. litigation under the Hague Evidence Convention for use in U.S. litigation.
Crowell & Moring attorneys also have considerable experience in assisting foreign governments and private parties in securing evidence in the U.S. for use in foreign criminal investigations and civil proceedings. One of our attorneys represented the Government of Chile in securing crucial evidence used in the proceedings against former Chilean President Augusto Pinochet.
Cross-Border Litigation Risk Assessment & Management
Crowell & Moring regularly counsels foreign sovereigns, state-owned entities, and multinational corporations on how to approach (and, when necessary, avoid) litigation in the United States and how to manage litigation once it commences. In particular, we have counseled foreign corporations on methods to avoid the expansive jurisdictional reach of U.S. federal and state courts, including, e.g., the FSIA, the act of state, political question, and special factors doctrines, and international service requirements. When jurisdiction does lie, we counsel our international clients on the use of anti-suit injunctions, the forum non conveniens doctrine, and other vehicles to have cases removed from U.S. courts to more favorable jurisdictions. Of course, when it is in our clients’ interests to litigate in the U.S., we have a best-in-class litigation team equipped to pursue any U.S. litigation to its completion.
Cross-Border Litigation in the U.S. and Abroad
Crowell & Moring provides top-notch litigation expertise to international parties in domestic proceedings involving a wide-range of complex legal disputes. We also have experience managing and coordinating parallel litigation proceedings simultaneously in several international jurisdictions, including foreign courts and international arbitral forums. Crowell & Moring’s offices in London and Brussels significantly bolster the firm’s international litigation capabilities in Europe, including practicing before European courts and tribunals. In addition, we have a close working relationship with numerous local firms in continental Europe, Asia, Africa, and Central and South America, which provides a unique competitive advantage to our U.S. clients who are litigating abroad.
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)
Crowell & Moring provides counseling and litigation services to domestic, foreign, and multi-national clients regarding compliance with, and enforcement of, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Our practice involves representing clients in investigations and prosecutions by the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. We also assist clients by designing and implementing FCPA compliance programs, conducting internal investigations concerning transactions with potential FCPA risks, training company personnel, and devising due diligence and other compliance-based tools to help clients safely and productively conduct global business consistent with U.S. and international anti-corruption laws.
Representative Engagements
- Secured $6 billion judgment on behalf of the estates and family members of seven U.S. nationals that perished and the U.S. owner of the aircraft that was destroyed in the bombing of UTA Flight 772. (Pugh v. Libya, Case No. 02-2026 (D.D.C.)) [for more information visit crowell.com/UTAFlight772]
- Represented airport authority in claims arising out of collapse of airport terminal at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris; also represented airport authority and airline in wrongful death litigation in the U.S. arising from collapse resulting in successful settlement of claims asserted on behalf of United States and Lebanese residents. (Jaoude et al. v. Air France KLM et al., Case No. 06-2465 (JG) (E.D.N.Y.))
- Represented the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in a dispute between the Jordanian Royal Family and the Assad Family of Syria. (In re B-727 Aircraft Serial No. 21010, et al. and Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan v. Layale Enterprises, S.A., Case No. 00-11018 (5th Cir.))
- Won appeal in D.C. Circuit involving the FSIA jurisdiction under the "commercial activity" exception in suit against Republic of Congo; represented an international energy development firm in an oil production dispute with the Republic of the Congo. (Gulf Resources America, Inc. v. Republic of Congo, Case No. 03-7118 (D.C. Cir.))
- Secured more than $41 million in compensatory damages and $300 million in punitive damages for journalist Terry Anderson resulting from his March 1985 kidnapping and nearly seven years of being held hostage in Lebanon by agents of Iran. (Anderson v. Iran, Case No. 99-00698 (D.D.C.))
- Successfully defended products liability claims against US manufacturer by plaintiffs residing in Scotland, England, and New Zealand in Delaware state court. (Bowen v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 2005 WL 1952859 (Del. Super. Ct., June 23, 2005), aff’d., 906 A.2d 787 (Del. 2006))
- Secured more than $53 million in compensatory damages and $300 million in punitive damages for Thomas M. Sutherland resulting from his June 1985 kidnapping and his six and one-half years of being held hostage in Lebanon by agents of Iran. (Sutherland v. Iran Case No. 99-03279 (D.D.C.))
- Handled FTCA claim against U.S. government in D.C. federal court related to wrongful death caused by U.S. State Department employee in Africa. (Fair-Gray v. United States, Case No. 03-01372 (D.D.C.))
- Utilized the ATCA as a jurisdictional tool for foreign plaintiffs in a victims of terrorism case against Libya. (Patel v. Iran, Case No. 06-00626 (D.D.C.))
- Represented French manufacturer of helicopters in all cases east of the Mississippi and Canada including crash of Super Puma in Brunei which resulted in claims in France, Brunei and the U.S. (Williamson v. Eurocopter, AMPEP et al., Case No. 98-0529 (S.D. TX.))
- Pursued libel claim on behalf private citizen against a Swiss company, widely reported to have an extensive business relationship with Gulnora Karimova (the daughter of the President of Uzbekistan), for deliberately posting false statements on the Internet to harm the family and its international businesses. (Maqsudi, et al. v. Global Options, Inc., et al., Case No. 07-01252 (D.D.C.))
- Secured substantial judgments on behalf of U.S. and foreign victims of terrorism in claims against Iran and Libya. (See supra, e.g., Anderson v. Iran, Sutherland v. Iran, Patel v. Iran, Dammarell v. Iran)
- Pursued assets seized illegally by the Uzbekistan government and sold to U.S. entity and transferred to Swiss alter-ego in attempt to evade the law. (Roz Trading Ltd., et al. v. Zeromax Group, et al., Case No. 06-01040 (D.D.C.))
- Successfully converted $24 million foreign judgment of shipping company against Yugoslavian bank into U.S. judgment and represented shipping company in enforcement of judgment including dealing with OFAC provisions and attempts by Yugoslavian bank to transfer assets from the United States in U.S. Bankruptcy Court ancillary proceeding. (Ali Shipping Corp. v. Jugobanka D.D. Beograd et al., Supreme Court of N.Y., Case No. 122545/96)
