"Affirming for the first time that section 1782 applications extend to treaty arbitrations, a New York court has allowed Chevron to access 600 hours of unreleased footage from a 2009 documentary film, to be used as evidence in an arbitration with Ecuador and other legal proceedings."

"Yesterday a federal court in New York granted Chevron's request for discovery of outtakes from the 2009 documentary Crude about the multi-billion dollar litigation in Ecuador. Chevron's request was pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782, which authorizes a judge in the United States to order discovery of evidence to be used in proceedings before a foreign tribunal." -- Also published on Kluwer Arbitration Blog: http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/blog/2010/05/07/chevrons-discovery-of-crude-outtakes/

Note on In re Application of Chevron Corp., Misc. No. 19-111 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2010) with link to the not-officially-published decision

Antrag der KB Deutsche Industriebank AG vor dem D. Mass. auf Durchführung des Beweisverfahrens nach § 1782 gegen die Putnam Advisory Company, LLC, zwecks Verwendung in einem Verfahren vor dem High Court of Justice in London (Verteidigung gegen Klage der Calyon Credit Agricole CIB). Dem Antrag wurde am 26.1.2010 stattgegeben.

Note on Phoenix Meridian Equity Limited v Lyxor Asset management S.A., CICA No, 4 of 2009 (Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands) - "The issue raised by the appeal is whether the Chief Justice erred in principle in refusing an application on behalf of Lyxor for an order restraining Phoenix from continuing proceedings in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under [ 28 U.S.C. § 1782 ] in the course of which it seeks to depose two individuals (...) who have given witness statements in, and are potential witnesses at the trial of the Cayman proceedings."

by Stuart M. Riback (Siller Wilk LLP), prepared for the American Bar Association Business Law Section Spring Meeting 2007

by Charles Owen Verrill Jr

by Abram I. Moore (Chicago) - Note on El Paso Corp. v. La Comision Ejecutiva Hidroelectrica Del Rio Lempa (5th Cir. Aug 6, 2009) and the two district court decisions in In re: Application of Operadora DB Mexico, S.A. de C. V. (Fla.) and In re An Arbitration in London, England (Ill.)

by Sofia E. Biller and Howard S. Suskin

Note on In re Arbitration in London, England between Norfolk Southern Corp. et al. and Ace Bermuda Ltd., No. 1:09-cv-03092 (N.D. Ill. Jun 15, 2009) (An appeal from that decision is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit)

"In a number of recent rulings, US courts have interpreted the scope of 28 U.S.C. s. 1782 (...). These rulings, which all resulted in dismissing s.1782 applications, may suggest a growing trend towards narrowly interpreting the statute."

Oliver L. Knöfel, Journal of Private International Law, Volume 5, Number 2, August 2009, pp. 281-309 Abstract: Until today, a variety of mechanisms of State courts assisting foreign arbitral tribunals in the taking of evidence has been developed in international legal practice. Unfortunately, none of the legal avenues nowadays available to arbitrators presents a coherent or convincing picture. One has to explore a wealth of diverse and scattered sources when an arbitral tribunal needs or wishes to obtain evidence abroad. What is more, it is often considered excessive to oblige a State to lend assistance to arbitral proceedings held outside its own territory. In 2004, however, the US Supreme Court decided to examine the concept of "tribunal" as used in 28 U.S.C. section 1782 under a functional lens. In the wake of this decision several US District Courts have been reading section 1782 to authorise subpoenas in aid of foreign arbitrations. The new US jurisprudence offers a unique opportunity to reinvent the US-German relationship under the Hague Evidence Convention of 1970. This article aims at broadening the scope of international judicial assistance in its entirety. The plan is to begin by exploring the legal avenues by which arbitral panels can obtain evidence abroad and seek judicial assistance of foreign States' courts de lege lata. Then the impact of the newly established, arbitration-friendly US case-law on judicial assistance as granted under 28 U.S.C. section 1782 will be studied. Finally, the new US jurisprudence will be used as the basis to argue for a different attitude towards arbitration proceedings than that now prevailing under the Hague Evidence Convention of 1970 and under the European Evidence Regulation of 2001. Both instruments should be interpreted to encompass international arbitral tribunals.

Note on El Paso v. La Comision Ejecutiva Hidroelectrica del Rio Lempa, No. 08-20771 (5th Cir. Aug 6, 2009) with PDF of decision