APR Energy, LLC v. First Investment Group Corp.
88 F. Supp. 3d 1300
M.D. Fla.2015Background
- APR Energy, LLC seeks to bar Libyan proceedings and compel arbitration under a Services Agreement with FIGCorp and FEG; the agreement requires arbitration under ICC rules for disputes arising under the contract, with a narrow Section 10(h) exception for preliminary injunctive relief; Libyan proceedings sought to attach or withhold funds due to APR; the court previously granted partial relief directing arbitration and later issued judgments and reconsiderations refining the party identities in the Libyan proceeding; Defendants filed ICC arbitration against APR and sought Libyan precautionary measures; the Court later concluded the Libyan action was not within the 10(h) exception and granted an anti-suit injunction to enforce arbitration and halt Libyan proceedings; the current Order finalizes judgment on Counts 1 and 3, directs arbitration, and dissolves the Libyan hold.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Libyan Proceeding is arbitrable under the Services Agreement. | APR Energy contends Libyan action seeks pre-judgment relief outside arbitration. | FIGCorp/FEG argue Libyan action is authorized under Clause 10(h) for injunctive relief prior to arbitration. | Libyan Proceeding arbitrable; Court orders arbitration of the Libyan claim under the Agreement. |
| Whether an anti-suit injunction should be issued to halt the Libyan Proceeding. | Anti-suit injunction warranted to enforce arbitration and prevent sidestepping arbitration. | Presence of GECOL and non-identical parties undermines identity and dispositive criteria; Libyan action not dispositive. | Anti-suit injunction granted; Libyan Proceeding enjoined and withdrawal of hold ordered. |
| Whether APR is obligated to post an injunction bond. | Bond waiver in the Services Agreement; potential need for bond debated. | No bond required given one-way bond waiver; Court declines to impose bond. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paramedics Electromedicina Comercial, Ltda. v. GE Med. Sys. Info. Techs., Inc., 369 F.3d 645 (2d Cir.2004) (threshold anti-suit injunction criteria; dispositive effect of arbitrability ruling)
- Canon Latin Am., Inc. v. Lantech (CR), S.A., 508 F.3d 597 (11th Cir.2007) (gatekeeping inquiry for anti-suit injunction; similarity of parties and dispositiveness)
- Pension Fund for Am., L.C. v. S.E.C., 396 Fed.Appx. 577 (11th Cir.2010) (identity of parties not strictly literal; effectiveness considered)
- Bautista v. Star Cruises, 396 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2005) (convention enforcement; four prerequisites for arbitration under Convention Act)
- Lindo v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd., 652 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir.2011) (strong presumption in favor of arbitration; international commerce policy)
- Karaha Bodas Co. v. Perusahaan Pertambangan Minyak Dan Gas Bumi Negara, 335 F.3d 357 (5th Cir.2003) (consolidates arbitration policy in international disputes)