Case Preview: Rockefeller v. Changzhou Sinotype

The California Supreme Court has given its decision in Rockefeller Technology Investments (Asia) VII v. Changzhou Sinotype Technology Co. (Cal. 2020). I will have full coverage next week, but I wanted readers to have early access to this important decision. This is the case of the parties who agreed to “service” (I put the word in quotes because it is at issue in the decision) in China by Fedex. The question was whether such an agreement can overcome China’s Article 10(a) objection under the Service Convention, which is really another way of asking: is Article 10 there to protect the interests of the litigants, or of the state?

If you have read my prior coverage here or in the ABA Section on International Law’s Year in Review, you won’t be surprised to hear me say that the decision is wrong. It is wrong in big ways and wrong in little ways. And it is needlessly wrong: the parties could have accomplished what they wanted to accomplish without running afoul of the Convention. But more to come next week. So do your homework and read the decision.

One response to “Case Preview: Rockefeller v. Changzhou Sinotype”

  1. […] about the intermediate appellate decision in October 2018, and I briefly noted the new decision last week. Sinotype was a Chinese company. The parties were negotiating towards a contract to form a new […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Thank you for commenting! By submitting a comment, you agree that we can retain your name, your email address, your IP address, and the text of your comment, in order to publish your name and comment on Letters Blogatory, to allow our antispam software to operate, and to ensure compliance with our rules against impersonating other commenters.