-
Response to Aaron Marr Page
Many thanks to Ted Folkman and the symposium contributors for a rich discussion. Here I respond to Aaron Page’s post. Later I will comment on Ted’s posts and comments addressed to me. In Page’s rhetorical view, the fraud in the Ecuadorian litigation against Chevron was a triviality in a teapot that should not deter US……
-
Response to Professors Whytock and Brand
Chris does a good job of detailing the tension between the traditional approach of the Ashenden analysis and the new approach of the UFCMJRA, which I referenced in my post. In particular I think he correctly describes how the new case-specific UFCMJRA grounds essentially turn the enforcing court into an appellate court on due process……
-
The Global Context for Forum Non Conveniens and for Case-Specific Exceptions to Recognition of Foreign Judgments
Professor Whytock’s comment today correctly notes in its next-to-last paragraph that “the ship of case-specific exceptions has set sail.” This statement is in response to my comments on the 2005 Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act and the 2005 ALI Proposed Federal Statute. It is important to take account not just of the national context……
-
A Response to Professor Brand
Thanks again to Ted Folkman for hosting this discussion, from which I’ve learned a lot. There is much to discuss, and everyone has raised important points. However, I’ve found Professor Brand’s post particularly thought provoking as I continue to grapple with these issues—especially his comments regarding the case-specific defenses against enforcement contained in the 2005……
-
Procedural Uncoupling
Professor Brand notes that in evaluating the transnational litigation doctrines, “one must ask if these doctrines are the real problem.” He suggests that “in the Lago Agrio case, the real problem is something much different, and perhaps more fundamental, than an imbalance in rules of private international law.” It’s certainly true that there are deeper……