Section 1782 Discovery in International Arbitration: Factors to Consider in Light of U.S. Case Law

By Suh, Maurice M.; Trembly, Diana L. | Dispute Resolution Journal, February-April 2011 | Go to article overview

Section 1782 Discovery in International Arbitration: Factors to Consider in Light of U.S. Case Law


Suh, Maurice M., Trembly, Diana L., Dispute Resolution Journal


This article explores the case law addressing whether Section 1782 discovery is available to private or governmental international arbitral tribunals, or both. It discusses the lessons from the case law and the issues involved in planning to make a Section 1782 application.

Broad and expansive discovery distinguishes litigation in the United States from litigation in almost every other nation. This comparatively unchecked pre-trial procedure has often driven parties to resolve their cross-border commercial disputes in international arbitration, where discovery and prehearing procedures can be streamlined. This raises the question of whether the discovery allowed by Section 1782 of Title 28 of the United States Code applies to international arbitral tribunals, particularly those created under private arbitration agreements. There are many articles discussing the case law on this issue and this article covers some of the same ground. But what makes this article different is that it discusses some practical considerations concerning Section 1782 that parties should take into account when: (1) negotiating a dispute resolution clause (for example, whether to limit Section 1782 discovery in the arbitration agreement or prescribe particular procedures, and where to seat the arbitration), (2) preparing to arbitrate (such as what to look for in selecting the arbitrators), and (3) contemplating making a Section 1782 request in court (for instance, where to file the request-i.e., the district court in which to file and the timing of the request).

Requirements of Section 1782

Under Section 1782, litigants in certain foreign courts may apply to a U.S. district court to obtain discovery from a person or entity located in the U.S. for use in those foreign proceedings. The requesting party must show that the applicant is an "interested party" in a proceeding in a "foreign or international tribunal." There is also a procedural requirement. The request must be made to the district court in the district in which the person from whom discovery is sought resides or "is found."1

When Section 1782 was revised in 1964, international arbitration was not a common dispute resolution mechanism. U.S. courts readily granted Section 1782 applications for discovery in aid of proceedings in foreign courts. It was not until the early 1990s that courts faced the issue of whether the phrase a "foreign or international tribunal" applied to an international arbitral tribunal. The decisions from district courts were not uniform. The issue reached both the 2nd and 5th Circuits, each concluding that Section 1782 did not apply to international arbitral tribunals. Then Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices reached the U.S. Supreme Court.2 The Intel decision clarified a number of questions about Section 1782, but it did not decide whether the statute encompassed either governmental or private arbitral tribunals, or both. As a result, district courts continued to disagree.

Case Law Prior to 2004

Section 1782's application to arbitral tribunals was first addressed in 1994.3 Technostroyexport, a Russian association, obtained an order under Sec tion 1782 allowing it to serve subpoenas on In ternational Development and Trade Services, a New York corporation, for use in private arbitrations in Moscow and Stockholm against IDTS. IDTS filed a motion to quash the subpoenas, arguing that Section 1782 did not apply to arbitral tribunals. The district court did not agree and announced, "The court is of the view that an arbitrator or arbitration panel is a 'tribunal' un - der Section 1782." But it cited no authority for this opinion. Despite finding Section 1782 applicable to arbitral panels, the court vacated the or - der allowing the subpoenas because Techno - stroyexport had made no effort to first obtain the subpoenas through the tribunals in the foreign arbitrations. The court considered it improper to allow Technostroyexport to sidestep the arbitral panels' authority on the third-party discovery com pletely, commenting that "[i]t appears to be generally accepted that the rules and procedures in arbitration are intended to be radically different from the rules and procedures in the courts. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Section 1782 Discovery in International Arbitration: Factors to Consider in Light of U.S. Case Law
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.