Esso Expl. & Prod. Nigeria v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp.

33 Citing cases

  1. Compania de Inversiones Mercantiles v.Grupo Cementos de Chihuahua S.A.B. de C.V.

    No. 21-1196 (10th Cir. Jan. 10, 2023)

    A "secondary jurisdiction" is the country where confirmation of that award is sought. See id.; see also Esso Expl. &Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2022).

  2. Compañía De Inversiones Mercantiles S.A. v. Grupo Cementos de Chihuahua S.A.B. de C.V.

    58 F.4th 429 (10th Cir. 2023)   Cited 9 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Identifying C.R.C.P. 69(g) as "one [supplemental] procedure"

    A "secondary jurisdiction" is the country where confirmation of that award is sought. See id . ; see also Esso Expl. & Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp. , 40 F.4th 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2022). The Convention states that "[e]ach Contracting State shall recognize arbitral awards as binding."

  3. Compania de Inversiones Mercantiles v.Grupo Cementos de Chihuahua S.A.B. de C.V.

    No. 21-1196 (10th Cir. Jan. 10, 2023)

    A "secondary jurisdiction" is the country where confirmation of that award is sought. See id.; see also Esso Expl. &Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2022).

  4. Olin Holdings Ltd. v. Libya

    73 F.4th 92 (2d Cir. 2023)   Cited 27 times
    Affirming confirmation of arbitral award in favor of third-party investor based on Libya's breaches of bilateral investment treaty with the Republic of Cyprus

    "Reversal is warranted only where the district court's decision rests on an error of law or clearly erroneous factual finding, where its decision otherwise cannot be located within the range of permissible decisions, or where the district court has failed to consider all relevant factors or has unreasonably weighed those factors." Esso Expl. & Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 70 (2d Cir. 2022) (citing Norex Petroleum Ltd. v. Access Indus., Inc., 416 F.3d 146, 153 (2d Cir. 2005)).

  5. UiPath, Inc. v. Shanghai Yunkuo Info. Tech. Co.

    23 Civ. 7835 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 4, 2024)   Cited 1 times

    Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2022).

  6. Glob. Gaming Phil., LLC v. Razon

    21 Civ. 2655 (LGS) (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 12, 2023)   Cited 2 times

    See Esso Expl. & Prod'n Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petrol. Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 69 (2d Cir. 2022) (“An alter ego relationship is not easy to establish .... [existing] only where the instrumentality is so extensively controlled . . . that a relationship of principal and agent is created or where affording the entity separate juridical status would work fraud or injustice.”);

  7. Nelson v. Elmcroft Senior Living

    CIVIL 3:21-CV-312(OAW) (D. Conn. Jun. 22, 2023)

    .R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), (5). The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has recognized that “[i]n general, three requirements must be satisfied before a district court may lawfully exercise personal jurisdiction over a party . . . .” Esso Expl. & Prod. Nigeria Ltd. V. Nigerian Nat' Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 68-69 (2d Cir. 2022). Specifically, “(1) ‘the plaintiff's service of process upon the defendant must have been procedurally proper'; (2) ‘there must be a statutory basis for personal jurisdiction that renders such service of process effective'; and (3) ‘the exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with constitutional due process principles.'” Id. (quoting Waldman v. Palestine Liberation Org., 835 F.3d 317, 327 (2d Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks omitted)). “[T]he plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the court has jurisdiction over the defendant.

  8. Peterson v. Markazi

    15-690-cv(L) (2d Cir. Nov. 13, 2024)

    A. Legal Standard "When considering a district court's ruling on personal jurisdiction, 'we review its factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo.'" Esso Expl. &Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 68 (2d Cir. 2022) (quoting Frontera Res. Azerbaijan Corp. v. State Oil Co. of the Azerbaijan Republic, 582 F.3d 393, 395 (2d Cir. 2009)).

  9. MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC (In re Sears Holdings Corp.)

    20-1846-bk (2d Cir. Nov. 6, 2023)

    See Esso Expl. &Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 68 (2d Cir. 2022). On the merits, for the reasons stated in the District Court's February 27, 2020 opinion, Transform has not given "adequate assurance of future performance of [the] lease" as required by 11 U.S.C. § 365(b)(3)(A).

  10. Corporación AIC, SA v. Hidroeléctrica Santa Rita S.A.

    66 F.4th 876 (11th Cir. 2023)   Cited 12 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Observing that "[c]onfirmation under the [Federal Arbitration Act] is essentially the same as recognition and enforcement under the New York Convention"

    Although we do not address the Panama Convention today, we note that its enforcement and recognition provisions are "substantively identical" to those in the New York Convention. See Esso Expl. & Prod. Nigeria Ltd. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 40 F.4th 56, 62 n.2 (2d Cir. 2022); TermoRio, 487 F.3d at 933. Relying on the panel decision in this case, one of our recent decisions states that the "Panama Convention lists seven defenses which provide the exclusive grounds for vacatur."