Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:26:51.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carl Marks … Co. v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 82 , Issue 1 , January 1988 , pp. 129 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2) (no jurisdictional immunity if action of the foreign state is “based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state . . . or upon an act outside the territory of the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere and that act causes a direct effect in the United States”).

2 H.R.Rep.No. 1487, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 14 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 6604, 6613 (characterizing commercial acts within the meaning of the FSIA as “those which private persons might normally perform” and noting, “Moreover, both a sale of bonds to the public and a direct loan from a U.S. commercial bank to a foreign government are activities which are of a commercial nature and should be treated like other similar commercial transactions”). H.R. Rep. No. 1487 at 10.

3 665 F.Supp. 323, 336.

4 Id. at 347.

5 Letter of Jack, B. Tate, Acting Legal Adviser, Department of State, to Acting Attorney General Philip B. Perlman, May 19, 1952 Google Scholar, reprinted in 26 Dept. St. Bull. 984–85 (1952).

6 665 F.Supp. at 336 (citing Jackson v. People’s Republic of China, 596 F.Supp. 386, 388 (N.D. Ala.), aff’d, 794 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 107 S.Ct. 1371 (1987)).

7 28 U.S.C. § 1330(a) (1982).

8 Plaintiffs relied on this statement from Verlinden B.V. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, 461 U.S. 480, 486 (1983). See 665 F.Supp. at 337.

9 See Berizzi Bros. Co. v. S.S. Pesaro, 271 U.S. 562, 572 (1926) (extending immunity in an in rem action to a merchant ship owned and controlled by the Italian Government).

10 665 F.Supp. at 338.

11 Schmidt v. Polish People’s Republic, 579 F.Supp. 23 (S.D.N.Y.), aff’d, 742 F.2d 67 (2d Cir. 1984); Von Dardel v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 623 F.Supp. 246 (D.D.C. 1985); and Asociacion de Reclamantes v. United Mexican States, 561 F.Supp. 1190 (D.D.C. 1983), aff’d, 735 F.2d 1517 (D.C. Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 470 U.S. 1051 (1985).

12 665 F.Supp. at 348 (relying on Slade v. United States of Mexico, 617 F.Supp. 351 (D.D.C. 1985), aff’d mem., 790 F.2d 183 (D.C. Cir. 1986), cert, denied, 107 S.Ct. 1360 (1987); and Jackson v. People’s Republic of China, 596 F.Supp. 386 (N.D. Ala. 1984), aff’d, 794 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir. 1986), cert, denied, 107 S.Ct. 1371 (1987)).

13 Id. at 349.