Af-Cap, Inc. v. Republic of Congo, 03-50506.
| Decision Date | 01 November 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 03-50506.,No. 03-50560.,03-50506.,03-50560. |
| Citation | 389 F.3d 503 |
| Parties | AF-CAP, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The REPUBLIC OF CONGO, Defendant-Appellee, CMS Oil and Gas Co., et al., Garnishees, CMS Nomeco Congo Inc., the Nuevo Congo Co., Nuevo Congo Ltd., Garnishees-Appellees. AF-CAP, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The Republic of Congo, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Laura Metcoff Klaus, Sanford M. Saunders, Jr. (argued), Greenberg Traurig, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Boaz S. Morag (argued), Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton, New York City, for Defendant-Appellee.
Guy Stanford Lipe (argued), Vinson & Elkins, Houston, TX, for Garnishees-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas; Sam Sparks, Judge.
(Opinion Sept. 17, 2004, 5th Cir., 383 F.3d 361).
Before JOLLY and PRADO, Circuit Judges.1
2
IT IS ORDERED that Appellee's motion for reconsideration of the Court's order of September 29, 2004, granting Appellant's motion to issue the mandate forthwith is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellee's alternative motion to recall the mandate pending consideration of the petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Rehearing is GRANTED. Our decision that the Garnishees' intangible obligations to the Congo had been used for commercial purposes in the United States in the past, and thus were subject to garnishment by Af-Cap, was based on the past use of those obligations to settle a debt owed by the Congo to National Union Fire Insurance Company ("NUFI"). We clarify that our opinion should not be interpreted to permit garnishment of obligations that were not used in the past for commercial purposes in the United States. Thus, to the extent that tax obligations were not used to satisfy the NUFI debt, such obligations cannot be reached by the garnishment proceedings in this case. Instead, the Garnishees' obligations to the Congo are subject to garnishment by Af-Cap only to the extent that those obligations were used in the past to settle the NUFI debt, irrespective of whether the Garnishees and the Congo label those obligations "taxes" or "royalties". We entrust to the sound discretion of the district court the implementation of the clear intent of our opinion. No member of this panel nor judge in regular active service on the court having requested that the court be polled on Rehearing En...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kuwait Pearls Catering Co. v. Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc.
...the dispute implicates the legitimacy of public acts undertaken by a sovereign nation"), clarified on other grounds on rehearing, 389 F.3d 503 (5th Cir. 2004). Here KPCC concedes that the Security Agreement is a valid, binding and enforceable agreement by and between the United States and R......
-
Crystallex Int'l Corp. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venez.
...was ‘for commercial purposes.’ " Af-Cap Inc. v. Republic of Congo , 383 F.3d 361, 368 (5th Cir.), decision clarified on reh'g , 389 F.3d 503 (5th Cir. 2004). This requires "a more holistic approach," requiring the Court to "examine the totality of the circumstances surrounding the property.......
-
Af-Cap, Inc. v. Republic of Congo
...National Union Fire Insurance Company ("NUFI"). Af-Cap Inc. v. Republic of Congo, 383 F.3d 361, amended on rehearing, 389 F.3d 503 (5th Cir.2004) (hereinafter "Af-Cap II"). It also found that the situs of the obligations was the United States. Id. at 373. This Court again remanded, this tim......
-
Fg Hemisphere Associates v. Republique Du Congo
...that the working interest satisfies either requirement for application of the § 1610(a) exception to execution immunity. To sum up: In the Af-Cap cases, we decided that (1) the obligations to pay royalties to the Congo, here at issue in FG Hemisphere I, had been "used for commercial activit......