Preble-Rish Haiti, S.A. v. Republic of Haiti
1:22-cv-07503
S.D.N.Y.Sep 7, 2023Background:
- PRH (Preble-Rish Haiti, S.A.) obtained a $28,184,756.65 arbitration Final Award against the Republic of Haiti (ROH) and BMPAD arising from unpaid fuel contracts.
- ROH litigated in New York state court in 2020–2022 seeking to stay arbitration; Justice Borrok denied the stay and compelled arbitration, and the Appellate Division affirmed.
- The arbitration panel issued its Final Award on August 23, 2022; PRH filed to confirm under the New York Convention and FAA in SDNY and the Court confirmed the Award (June 29, 2023); final judgment entered July 20, 2023.
- ROH appealed to the Second Circuit and moved in district court for a stay of enforcement pending appeal.
- District court denied the stay motion on the merits but granted a temporary 14-day administrative stay to allow ROH to seek relief in the Second Circuit; the court noted ROH may seek a stay by bond under Rule 62(b).
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Likelihood of success on appeal (arbitrability / ROH party status) | PRH: ROH was bound and lost state-court attacks; arbitration award stands | ROH: it was not a party to the contracts/arbitration, so panel exceeded authority | Court: ROH is precluded by its state-court litigation from relitigating party status; not likely to succeed |
| Irreparable injury to ROH if required to pay | PRH: economic harm is reparable by money judgment | ROH: payment will be dissipated in Haiti and irretrievable, so irreparable harm | Court: only economic harm shown; insufficient to establish irreparable injury |
| Substantial injury to PRH if stay granted | PRH: delay postpones recoverable monetary relief but can be satisfied later | ROH: stay appropriate to preserve appellate rights | Court: PRH's harm is economic and remediable; little likelihood of substantial, irreparable injury |
| Public interest / sovereign immunity / service under FSIA | PRH: ROH waived immunity; contracts include special-arrangement email service satisfying 28 U.S.C. §1608(a)(1) | ROH: comity and sovereign immunity counsel in favor of stay; court did not consider immunity on merits | Court: found waiver and valid special-arrangement service; public-interest/comity does not favor a stay |
Key Cases Cited
- Uniformed Fire Officers Assoc. v. de Blasio, 973 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2020) (stay-pending-appeal factors derived from Nken)
- Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) (stay standard—likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of equities, public interest)
- Silverman v. Benmor Coats, Inc., 61 N.Y.2d 299 (1984) (denial of stay to compel arbitration does not always preclude later challenge to panel jurisdiction)
- Commodities & Mins. Enter. Ltd. v. CVG Ferrominera Orinoco, C.A., 49 F.4th 802 (2d Cir. 2022) (FSIA service and related analyses)
- Arb. Between Space Sys./Loral, Inc. v. Yuzhnoye Design Off., 164 F. Supp. 2d 397 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (contractual notice provisions can constitute a special arrangement for service under FSIA)
- JSG Trading Corp. v. Tray-Wrap, Inc., 917 F.2d 75 (2d Cir. 1990) (economic harm alone generally does not establish irreparable injury)
- United States v. Paccione, 914 F. Supp. 1037 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (economic injury insufficient for irreparable-harm showing)