CEF Energía BV - Greentech Energy Systems AS - Athena Investments AS - NovEnergia General Partner SA - NovEnergia II Energy & Environment SCA - NovEnergia II Italian Portfolio v Italian Republic - United States District Court for the District of Columbia Civil Action No 2019-3443 - Memorandum Opinion by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson - 23 July 2020
Country
Year
2020
Summary
Memorandum Opinion
Petitioners CEF Energia, B.V. ("CEF Energia"), Greentech Energy Systems A/S (now known as Athena Investments A/S) ("Greentech"), NovEnergia General Partner S.A. (acting as liquidator of NovEnergia II Energy & Environment (SCA) SICAR) ("NEE"), and NovEnergia II Italian Portfolio ("NIP") (collectively, "Petitioners") are seeking to enforce two arbitral awards against the Italian Republic ("Italy" or "Respondent"). (See Pet. to Confirm Foreign Arbitral Award ("CEF Pet."), Case No. 19-cv-3443, ECF No. 1-1, at 1; Pet. to Confirm Foreign Arbitral Award ("Greentech Pet."), Case No. 19-cv-3444, ECF No. 1-1, at 2.)[1] Petitioners are companies that are incorporated in various European countries, and they engaged in two arbitrations with Italy under the Rules of Arbitration of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce ("Stockholm Rules"). (Id.) After Petitioners prevailed, Italy sought to set aside, or annul, the awards in the Svea Court of Appeal in Sweden (the "Svea Court"), and the Svea Court issued orders that prohibit the enforcement of the awards pending resolution of the challenge. (See Pet'rs' Response to Mot. to Dismiss ("Pet'rs' Response"), ECF No. 35, at 1516.)
Before this Court at present are Italy's motions to dismiss the Petitioners' bid to have this Court enforce the arbitration awards. (See Resp't's Mem. in Support of Mot. to Dismiss CEF Pet. ("Resp't's Mem. to Dismiss CEF"), Case No. 19-cv-3443, ECF No. 26-1; Resp't's Mem. in Support of Mot. to Dismiss Greentech Pet. ("Resp't's Mem. to Dismiss Greentech"), Case No. 19-cv-3444, ECF No. 35-1.) Italy argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction over these petitions and that the awards are not enforceable, or, in the alternative, Italy requests a stay of these proceedings pending the outcome of Italy's appeals in the Svea Court. (See Resp't's Mem. to Dismiss CEF at 910; Resp't's Mem. to Dismiss Greentech at 89.)
As discussed herein, this Court is persuaded that a temporary stay is in the interests of judicial economy and international comity, especially given the significant legal issues that underlie the parties' dispute, which arise from, and relate to, European Union law. Therefore, Italy's motion to stay the instant action will be GRANTED, and this case will be STAYED pending further Order of this Court. A separate Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will follow.
[1] Petitioners initially filed two separate cases that have been consolidated in this Court. When this Memorandum Opinion cites to a filing without listing a case number, the document was filed in the consolidated case--civil case number 19-cv-3443. Page-number citations to the documents that the parties have filed refer to the page numbers that the Court's electronic filing system automatically assigns.