Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak

Decision Date10 December 2002
Docket NumberDocket No. 02-7717(CON).,Docket No. 02-7547(XAP).,Docket No. 02-7515(CON).,Docket No. 02-7513(L).,Docket No. 02-7723(XAP).,Docket No. 02-7715(CON).
Citation313 F.3d 70
PartiesKARAHA BODAS COMPANY, L.L.C., Petitioner-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, v. PERUSAHAAN PERTAMBANGAN MINYAK DAN GAS BUMI NEGARA ("PERTAMINA"), Respondent-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia, Non-Party-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Christopher F. Dugan, Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue (Gregory A. Castanias and Steven C. Bennett, of counsel), Washington, DC, for Petitioner-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Matthew S. Slater, Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton (Jonathan I. Blackman, J.J. Gass, and Justin Anand, of counsel), Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.

Carolyn B. Lamm, White & Case (Francis A. Vasquez, Jr., and Frank Panopoluos, of counsel), Washington, DC, for Non-Party-Appellant-Cross-Appellee.

Before: CALABRESI, POOLER, and SACK, Circuit Judges.

SACK, Circuit Judge.

Respondent-appellant Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara ("Pertamina") and non-party-appellant the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia (the "Ministry") appeal from an April 26, 2002, memorandum and order issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Thomas P. Griesa, Judge) insofar as it permits petitioner-appellee Karaha Bodas Company, L.L.C. ("KBC") to execute against a portion of the funds in several Bank of America trust accounts that are listed in the district court's order. KBC appeals the same order insofar as it denies KBC's motion to execute against the remainder of the same funds. The question on appeal concerns the ownership of the funds in the Bank of America trust accounts, which derive from sales of Indonesian liquefied natural gas ("LNG"), and whether such funds can be attached under New York law, as applicable pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330, 1602-1611 ("FSIA"). KBC's claim rests on the allegation that all such funds belong to Pertamina, and on the alternative theory that KBC was entitled to rely on Pertamina's ownership thereof. Pertamina and the Ministry respond that under Indonesian law, the funds belong to the Republic of Indonesia.

We agree with the district court's disposition of the ownership question. The district court correctly analyzed the Indonesian law that controls the ownership of the funds and correctly concluded that most, but not all, of the funds belong to Indonesia. Accordingly, we affirm.

BACKGROUND
The Parties

KBC describes itself as "a Cayman Islands limited liability company formed by two American power companies and other investors, and is 90%-owned by U.S. investors." Petitioner-Appellee's Br. at 2. The Ministry, acting on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, is a "foreign state" within the meaning of the FSIA, 28 U.S.C. § 1603(a).1 Pertamina is an oil and gas company owned and controlled by the Republic of Indonesia. Pertamina engages in oil and gas exploration, extraction, processing, marketing, transportation, and distribution. The 1971 statute creating Pertamina, Law 8 of 1971, explains that the company's goals are "to develop and carry out the exploitation of oil and natural gas ... for the maximum prosperity of the People and the State."2 Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 8 Year 1971, Art. 5. The Indonesian government owns all of Pertamina's equity and controls a supervisory board, constituted pursuant to Law 8, that supervises Pertamina's management.3 Pertamina, for purposes of the FSIA, is therefore "an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state."4 28 U.S.C. § 1603.

The KBC-Pertamina Geothermal Energy Contracts

In November 1994, KBC executed two contracts — a "Joint Operation Contract" and an "Energy Sales Contract" — with Pertamina and another Indonesian state-owned entity, Persero, for the development of geothermal energy extraction facilities in the Karaha area of West Java. In these contracts, Pertamina waived "any ... right of immunity (sovereign or otherwise) which it or its assets now has or may acquire in the future." See, e.g., Karaha Geothermal Joint Operation Contract, Art. 21.7(c); Karaha Geothermal Energy Sales Contract, § 15.8(c). Pertamina also "consent[ed] in respect of the enforcement of any judgment against it." Karaha Geothermal Joint Operation Contract, Art. 21.7(d); Karaha Geothermal Energy Sales Contract, § 15.8(d). The contracts did not contain any representations about KBC's right to attach particular assets in case of default or breach. And KBC points to no evidence, either within the contracts' text or in pre-contract negotiations, that Pertamina made any representations regarding its ownership of LNG revenues or its obligation to provide a security interest. Each contract also contained a choice of law clause specifying Indonesian law and provided that disputes would be resolved by an international arbitral tribunal constituted under the Arbitral Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

In 1997 and 1998, Indonesia experienced a fiscal crisis that induced political instability and the eventual collapse, on May 21, 1998, of the regime led by President Mohamed Suharto. In the course of the crisis, on September 20, 1997, the KBC projects were suspended by an Indonesian "Presidential Decree," along with approximately seventy-four other government-related infrastructure projects. In November 1997, another decree permitted the KBC projects to proceed again, but in January 1998, a third decree terminated the KBC projects once more, despite lobbying by KBC and Pertamina, among others.

Arbitration on the Geothermal Energy Contracts

On April 30, 1998, KBC commenced arbitration in Geneva, Switzerland, alleging that the project's termination constituted a breach of the geothermal energy contracts. On September 30, 1999, the Swiss arbitral panel issued a preliminary ruling rejecting Pertamina's objections to arbitration and concluding that all of KBC's claims could be addressed in a unitary proceeding. The arbitral panel also rejected KBC's motion to treat the Republic of Indonesia as a party to the geothermal energy contracts.

In a December 18, 2000, award, the arbitral panel concluded that KBC had been "prevented from pursuing the performance of the binding contracts that it relie[d] upon for reasons beyond its control ... [and] should not bear the consequences thereof." Final Award in an Arbitration Procedure Between KBC and Pertamina and Persero, at 31. The arbitral panel awarded KBC damages for lost investments of $111.1 million and lost profits of $150 million plus interest and fees. Id. at 35-47. On February 1, 2001, Pertamina filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of Switzerland. The appeal was dismissed on April 24, 2002. Pertamina also asked an Indonesian court to enjoin enforcement and annul the award.5

Proceedings in the Southern District of Texas

KBC sought enforcement of the award in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas pursuant to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, June 10, 1958, implemented by Chapter Two of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 201-208. Rejecting Pertamina's numerous asserted defenses, the district court (Nancy Atlas, Judge) entered final judgment on December 4, 2001, in the amount of $261.1 million and interest at the rate of four percent per annum for KBC.6 Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara, 190 F.Supp.2d 936, 957 (S.D.Tex. 2001). Pertamina's appeal of that order is pending before the Fifth Circuit.

KBC, in an attempt to enforce the judgment, then moved before the Southern District of Texas to register that judgment in other judicial districts within the United States pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1963.7 KBC filed with the court, among other papers, an affidavit alleging that Pertamina had assets in seven New York banks. Judge Atlas held that KBC had fulfilled the requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1610(c) that a party seeking to attach a foreign sovereign's property refrain for "a reasonable period of time" after judgment, and permitted KBC to register the judgment in Delaware, New York, and California federal district courts. On February 15, 2002, Judge Atlas also granted KBC's motion for an ex parte writ of garnishment against Bank of America.

Proceedings in the Southern District of New York

On February 22, 2002, KBC presented the December 4, 2001, Southern District of Texas judgment to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for registration. The same day, the latter court issued an ex parte writ of execution and order to show cause pursuant to Fed R.Civ.P. 69(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1610(c) "author[izing KBC] to execute upon any property of Pertamina within this jurisdiction in satisfaction of the outstanding final judgment, amounting, to date, in total to the sum of $261,166,654.92 plus interest from January 1, 2001." Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 69(a) and N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 5222(b),8 the district court issued restraining notices, which KBC subsequently served upon Bank of America and several other banks.

The Nature of the Disputed Funds

This appeal concerns fifteen trust accounts at Bank of America.9 These accounts contain funds from the sale of LNG extracted in Indonesia under arrangements called Production Sharing Contracts ("PSCs"), which are governed by Indonesian law.

As mandated by Indonesian law, Pertamina enters into PSCs with private oil and gas contractors for the extraction of Indonesian crude oil and natural gas.10 The Republic of Indonesia is not party to the PSCs, but it must approve them. Under a PSC, the private contractor (the "PSC contractor") is...

To continue reading

Request your trial
97 cases
  • Dist. Attorney of N.Y. Cnty. v. Republic of the Phil.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 29 Marzo 2018
    ...of law rules to resolve all issues, except jurisdictional ones." Id. (quoting Karaha Bodas Co., LLC v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara ("Pertamina "), 313 F.3d 70, 84 (2d Cir. 2002) ). Therefore, "whether by operation of the interpleader statute or the FSIA, New York's ch......
  • O'Bryan v. Holy See
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 24 Noviembre 2008
    ... ... resolve `all issues,' except jurisdictional ones." Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi ... ...
  • Peterson v. Islamic Republic Of Iran
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 3 Diciembre 2010
    ...v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 380 F.3d 1000, 1006-07 (7th Cir.2004) (applying Illinois law); Karaha Bodas Co., LLC v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara, 313 F.3d 70, 83 (2d Cir.2002) (applying New York law). California enforcement law authorizes a court to "order the judgmen......
  • O'Bryan v. Holy See
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 10 Febrero 2009
    ... ... resolve `all issues,' except jurisdictional ones." Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
3 books & journal articles
  • ILLIBERAL LAW IN AMERICAN COURTS.
    • United States
    • 1 Mayo 2020
    ...government's statement is not entitled to absolute or complete deference in all circumstances"), and Karaha Bodas Co. v. Pertamina, 313 F. 3d 70, 92 (2d Cir. 2002) ("Where a choice between two interpretations of ambiguous foreign law rests finely balanced, the support of a foreign sovereign......
  • Incorporating the Third Party Beneficiary Principle in Natural Resource Contracts
    • United States
    • University of Georgia School of Law Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law No. 43-1, 2014
    • Invalid date
    ...3, available at http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---ilo_aids/documents/legaldocument/wcms_174556.pdf.204. 313 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 2002).205. Id. at 75, 77-78.206. Id. at 75.207. Id. at 81.208. Id. 209. Id.210. Id. at 87.211. Id. (the Indonesian interest in the f......
  • Class Actions - Thomas M. Byrne and Suzanne M. Alford
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 56-4, June 2005
    • Invalid date
    ...at 1308. 99. Id. at 1307-08. 100. 536 U.S. 1 (2002). 101. aal High Yield Bond Fund, 361 F.3d at 1309-10. 102. Id. at 1310. 103. Id. 104. 313 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 2002). 105. 296 F.3d 975 (10th Cir. 2002). 106. AAL High Yield Bond Fund, 361 F.3d at 1310. 107. Id. 108. Id. at 1310-11. 109. Id. at......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT