Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T11:05:50.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Allied Bank International v. Banco Credito Agricola de Cartago. 566 F.Supp. 1440

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Monroe Leigh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 441 - 443
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The parties subsequently stipulated that there were no issues of fact to be tried with respect to the act of state doctrine, and the court thereupon issued a memorandum order dismissing the action.

2 566 F. Supp. 1440, 1443.

3 Id. (relying on International Ass’n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. OPEC, 649 F.2d 1354, 1359 (9th Cir. 1981), summarized in 76 AJIL 160 (1982), cert, denied, 454 U.S. 1163 (1982)).

4 The court relied upon Texas Trading & Milling Corp. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, 647 F.2d 300, 316 n.38 (2d Cir. 1981), summarized in 75 AJIL 968 (1981), cert, denied, 454 U.S. 1148 (1982), which specified the following factors to be considered in applying the act of state doctrine: (1) whether a court is asked to judge a foreign government’s conduct under ambiguous principles of international law; (2) whether the challenged governmental conduct is public rather than commercial in nature; (3) whether the purpose of the action was to serve an integral governmental function; and (4) whether the United States Government has stated its views regarding the propriety of applying the act of state doctrine or the validity of the foreign government’s action.

5 566 F. Supp. at 1443 (emphasis in original).

6 425 U.S. 682 (1976), summarized in 70 AJIL 828 (1976).

7 Supra note 4.

8 566 F. Supp. at 1444.

9 See, e.g., Republic of Iraq v. First Nat’l City Bank, 353 F.2d 47, 51 (2d Cir. 1965), cert, denied, 382 U.S. 1027 (1966); Libra Bank Ltd. v. Banco Nacional de Costa Rica, 570 F. Supp. 870 (S.D.N.Y. 1983) (summarized below); H. Steiner & D. Vagts, Transnational Legal Problems 676 (2d ed. 1976).

10 The district court’s decision has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. See Allied Bank International v. Banco Credito Agricola de Cartago, appeal docketed, No. 83–7714 (2d Cir. Aug. 18, 1983).