The case of the day is Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. v. M2 Motor Yachts (S.D. Fla. 2017). The action was an admiralty case arising out of a fire aboard a yacht, allegedly caused by a defective switch manufactured by one of the several Valeo companies. Two of the defendants were Valeo SA, a French company, and Valeo Switches Und Detection Systems, a German company.
The case of the day is Icon DE Holdings LLC v. Eastside Distributors (S.D.N.Y. 2015). Icon sued Eastside and served process in Quebec. The precise manner of service was unclear. Icon claimed it proceeded via the Quebec central authority. But while I see an affidavit of service from the process server I don’t see an Article 6 certificate from the central authority. My assumption is that Icon properly sent a request for service to the central authority but that instead of sending back an Article 6 certificate the central authority sent the affidavit. In any event, Icon served the documents in English but without a French translation. It obtained a default judgment. Eastside successfully moved to vacate the judgment on grounds of insufficient service…
Tagged: Canada, Hague Service Convention, Quebec, translation
The case of the Day is Regenicin, Inc. v. Lonza Walkersville, Inc., (N.D. Ga. 2014). Regenicin sued Lonza Walkersville for breach of contract, tortious interference, and other business torts. Regencin sought leave to effect service on one of the defendants, Lonza Group, Ltd., in Switzerland under the Hague Service Convention. You might say, “a plaintiff doesn’t need to seek leave to invoke the Convention,” and you would be right, but Regenicin’s motion was actually a bit more ambitious: Regenicin sought leave to serve the documents via the Convention, but without having to translate the exhibits, which were voluminous. Article 5 permits the central authority to require translations.
Tagged: Hague Service Convention, Switzerland, translation