abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

5 Jun 2015

Author:
Herbert Smith Freehills, PIL Notes

Singapore: High Court dismisses appeal against enforcement of US judgement in Curaçao Drydock case over forced labour

"Alien Tort litigation comes to Singapore: international enforcement of judgments based on corporate human rights abuse", 3 Jun 2015

In Alberto Justo Rodriguez Licea and others v Curacao Drydock Co, Inc, the Singapore High Court dismissed an appeal against the enforcement of a multi-million dollar judgment issued in the United States awarding damages to Cuban plaintiffs under the US Alien Tort Statute (ATS)... In October 2008, the US District Court...gave judgment in favour of the plaintiffs, who were awarded...compensatory...and...punitive damages...[I]n July 2013, the plaintiffs commenced enforcement proceedings...in Singapore...The punitive element was dropped...[T]he defendant sought to set aside the Singapore Judgment...[T]he Assistant Recorder...made clear that the forum non conveniens doctrine was an irrelevant consideration...[And] noted that the plaintiffs had not sought to enforce the order to pay punitive damages and that there was no authority to suggest that the entire US Judgment was tainted...[The] Assistant Recorder concluded that neither of the submissions raised triable issues that merited setting aside the Singapore Judgment...The defendant next applied to the Singapore High Court...The appeal was dismissed. In a brief judgment, the High Court agreed with the Assistant Recorder...

Timeline

Privacy information

This site uses cookies and other web storage technologies. You can set your privacy choices below. Changes will take effect immediately.

For more information on our use of web storage, please refer to our Data Usage and Cookies Policy

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

Analytics cookie

ON
OFF

When you access our website we use Google Analytics to collect information on your visit. Accepting this cookie will allow us to understand more details about your journey, and improve how we surface information. All analytics information is anonymous and we do not use it to identify you. Google provides a Google Analytics opt-out add on for all popular browsers.

Promotional cookies

ON
OFF

We share news and updates on business and human rights through third party platforms, including social media and search engines. These cookies help us to understand the performance of these promotions.

Your privacy choices for this site

This site uses cookies and other web storage technologies to enhance your experience beyond necessary core functionality.