Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:06:00.653Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

S & S Machinery Co. v. Masinexportimport

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 77 , Issue 4 , October 1983 , pp. 880 - 882
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See H.R. Rep. No. 1487, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 15–16, reprinted in 1976 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 6604, 6614.

2 Agreement on Trade Relations between the United States and the Romanian Government, April 2, 1975, Art. IV, para. 2, 26 UST 2305, 2308–09, TIAS No. 8159 (emphasis added).

3 706 F.2d 411, 417.

4 676 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1982), summarized in 76 AJIL 851 (1982).

5 706 F.2d at 416. In this respect, the court contrasted its present conclusion with that in Libra Bank, where it had construed the waiver of “any right or immunity for legal proceedings including suit judgment and execution” to constitute an explicit waiver of immunity from prejudgment attachment within the meaning of § 1610(d)(1). The court also contrasted the explicit waiver requirement of §1610(d)(l) with the requirement of §1610(a) of the Act, which provides that a foreign state’s immunity from attachment as an aid in the execution of a judgment can be waived implicitly as well as explicitly.

6 See Libra Bank Ltd. v. Banco Nacional de Costa Rica, 676 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1982).