Thanks for your comment, Alessandro! It would be interesting to see whether the statistics on forum non conveniens dismissals have changed in the wake of this case. I don’t know whether or not they have. I would hesitate to draw too many general conclusions, though, from this unique case.

There was indeed an Alien Tort Statute claim in the Aguinda case.

Is there a chance to bring new proceedings in the United States? Well, not by those of the plaintiffs who are bound by the New York judgment. As a technical matter, perhaps other plaintiffs could bring a claim, because they are not barred by the court’s injunction, but I think that is far-fetched.

Thank you for both the recap and the update.

After the outcome of the court proceedings in Ecuador, I think that no US court will dare to dismiss again an action on grounds of “forum non convenient” where the alternate forum is a domestic court in a Latin American country (I know that not all countries in the region are the same so that I hope nobody will take offense on this, in addition I’m from Argentina).

My question Ted is whether the action initially brought by plaintiffs in the United States was an ATCA action.

I also wonder if there is any chance, even remote, to initiate fresh proceedings in the United States, after all the US court decision dismissing the claim on grounds of forum non convenient and referring the parties to Ecuador courts eventually led to a denial of justice. I am pretty persuaded that the low standards of transparency and integrity shown by the Ecuador court members render the ruling unenforceable in any advanced jurisdiction. I do not say, however, that the outcome is unfair.

Best

Alessandro