Telecom Business Solution, LLC v. Terra Towers Corp.
1:22-cv-01761
| S.D.N.Y. | Jul 21, 2025Background
- The dispute concerns a 2015 shareholders agreement among Telecom Business Solution, LLC ("TBS"), LATAM Towers, AMLQ Holdings, and Terra Towers Corp. ("Terra") regarding co-ownership and operation of Continental Towers LATAM Holdings, Ltd., a company developing telecom towers in Central and South America.
- Petitioners alleged Terra breached the agreement by obstructing a required sale of the company, which led to an arbitration initiated in February 2021.
- Multiple arbitral awards were issued, including ones mandating a sale and requiring cessation of foreign proceedings undermining the arbitration; these were confirmed by the Southern District of New York and affirmed by the Second Circuit.
- Petitioners sought further contempt sanctions, alleging that Respondents initiated criminal actions in Guatemala and El Salvador to impede compliance, particularly targeting the company CEO, Jorge Gaitán.
- The court had previously sanctioned Respondents and associated non-parties for noncompliance but declined to order withdrawal of foreign criminal complaints, treating such relief as an anti-suit injunction subject to international comity principles.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Further civil contempt for criminal actions | Initiation of criminal proceedings violates confirmed arbitral awards and court orders. | Criminal actions do not violate a clear, unambiguous order. | No further contempt warranted; orders not violated. |
| Order to withdraw criminal complaints | Court should compel withdrawal as actions impede compliance and target CEO. | Such order would constitute an anti-suit injunction; comity required. | Relief would be anti-suit injunction, thresholds not met. |
| Contempt for delay in compliance affidavits | Untimely filings warrant further sanctions. | Delay was minor and compliance was substantially achieved. | No additional sanctions imposed. |
| Civil confinement of Hernandez | Escalation of sanctions needed due to ongoing noncompliance. | No basis for further contempt found in record. | Civil confinement not appropriate at this time. |
Key Cases Cited
- China Trade & Dev. Corp. v. M.V. Choong Yong, 837 F.2d 33 (2d Cir. 1987) (establishes threshold criteria for anti-suit injunctions and importance of international comity)
- Chevron Corp. v. Donziger, 384 F. Supp. 3d 465 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (sets out civil contempt standard in SDNY)
- King v. Allied Vision, Ltd., 65 F.3d 1051 (2d Cir. 1995) (clear and unambiguous order requirement for contempt)
- Paramedics Electromedicina Comercial, Ltda v. GE Med. Sys. Info. Techs., 369 F.3d 645 (2d Cir. 2004) (substantial similarity of parties standard for anti-suit injunctions)