Kuwaiti Engineering Group v. Consortium of International Consultants, LLC
856 N.Y.S.2d 101
N.Y. App. Div.
2008
Check Treatment

KUWAITI ENGINEERING GROUP, Appellant, v CONSORTIUM OF INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS, LLC, Defendant, and SAFEGE INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Respondent.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department

March 19, 2007

856 NYS2d 101

Carol R. Edmead, J.

■ KUWAITI ENGINEERING GROUP, Appellant, v CONSORTIUM OF INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS, LLC, Defendant, and SAFEGE INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Respondent. [856 NYS2d 101]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered March 19, 2007, which granted the motion of defendant Safege Consulting Engineers (Safege) to dismiss the complaint on forum non conveniens grounds, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of conditioning the order of dismissal upon defendants’ consent to jurisdiction of the courts of Kuwait and France, and otherwise affirmed, with costs in favor of defendants, payable by plaintiff.

Dismissal of the complaint on forum non conveniens grounds (CPLR 327 [a]) was a provident exercise of discretion in this action where plaintiff, a Kuwaiti corporation, seeks to enforce a contract as a third-party beneficiary, and alleges, inter alia, tortious interference with its contract rights to act as agent for defendants in performing environmental consulting work in Kuwait. The motion court balanced the appropriate factors, including that defendant Consortium of International Consultants, LLC (CIC) is a Delaware limited liability company headquartered in Virginia, and Safege is a French corporation. The consulting work agreements at issue involved work to be wholly performed in Kuwait, and were negotiated, only in part, in New York, and were otherwise completed and executed outside New York. The conduct underlying the alleged interference with contractual rights occurred outside New York, and asagent to the consulting firms, plaintiff was obligated to obtain non-American, non-European union workers to assist the engineers in performing their work in Kuwait. Furthermore, the courts of either Kuwait or France provide viable alternative forums. Under these circumstances, we find that Safege met its heavy burden to establish that New York was an inconvenient forum (see e.g. ), and that a substantial nexus between New York and this action was lacking (see , cert denied ; ).

Although we agree with the motion court‘s dismissal of this action, we do not find plaintiff‘s appeal to be frivolous within the meaning of 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c). Accordingly, Safege‘s request for sanctions is denied (cf. , lv dismissed ). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias and Williams, JJ. [See 2007 NY Slip Op 30676(U).]