The Southern District of New York denied the Republic of Haiti's motion to stay enforcement of judgment pending its appeal to the Second Circuit on September 7, 2023. The reason behind this denial is simple: the Republic fails to show likelihood of success on the merits because its argument before the Second Circuit--that the arbitration award should not be confirmed because it was not a party to the arbitration agreement--is at odds with the argument it presented to the New York Supreme Court during an earlier, related action to enforce the arbitration agreement and compel arbitration. Because the Republic did not argue then that it was not party to the arbitration agreement, the Southern District explained, it cannot claim that at this stage in the proceedings.
The Southern District also explained that any injury to the Republic from the enforcement of the judgment is purely economical, further weighing in favor of denying the request for a stay. The Court noted that "foregoing is without prejudice to ROH’s right to stay enforcement, 'by providing a bond or other security'” under Rule 62(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The case is Preble-Rish Haiti, S.A. v. Republic of Haiti and Bureau de Monetisation des Programmes D'Aide au Developpment, No. 22-cv-7503 (S.D.N.Y.). Petitioner is represented by Lauren Brooke Wilgus, Rick Bruce Antonoff, and William Bennett III from Blank Rome LLP and Josef Maxim Klazen of Kobre & Kim LLP. Respondents are represented by Elizabeth Wolstein of Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP and Bertrand Rolf Madsen of Madsen Law P.C.
The opinion can be downloaded below.
Kommentare