No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
1 The facts of the case as alleged by the Loewen Group, Inc., may be found in its Notice of Claim (Oct. 30, 1998), Loewen Group v. United States (NAFTA Ch. 11 Arb. Trib.), while the U.S. government’s account of the facts may be found in U.S. Counter-Memorial (Mar. 30, 2001), Loewen Group v. United States (NAFTA Ch. 11 Arb. Trib.). Pleadings in the case are available online at <http://www.state.gOv/s/l/c3755.htm>.
2 Counsel for O’Keefe had contrasted Loewen’s “foreign” nationality with O’Keefe’s “Mississippi roots,” highlighted that O’Keefe was not racist (thereby implying that Loewen was racist), and made class-based distinctions between Loewen as a large, wealthy corporation and O’Keefe as a family-owned business. See Notice of Claim, supra note 1, para. 4.
3 Loewen believed that there was “good cause” to reduce the appeal bond and that the failure to do so was therefore arbitrary. For example, Loewen asserted that the judgment was patently excessive and “almost certainly would have been reduced or vacated on appeal.” Id., para. 5.
4 Memorial of the United States of America on Matters of Jurisdiction and Competence Arising from the Restructuring of the Loewen Group, Inc. at 13-16, 20 (Mar. 1, 2002), Loewen Group v. United States (NAFTA Ch. 11 Arb. Trib.) (footnotes omitted).