Shivani Bhardwaj

San Fransisco: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, California on Tuesday 1 August 2023 reversed the order given by a District Court that had confirmed the $1.3 billion award passed by the ICC in favour of Devas Multimedia and against Antrix Corporation, an arm of ISRO.

The California court has held that the district court had erred in exercising personal jurisdiction over Antrix. Responding to three companion appeals concerning an agreement between two Indian corporations: Devas Multimedia Private Ltd and Antrix Corp. Ltd.

In a Confirmation Appeal, Antrix challenged the district court’s orders denying its motion to dismiss and confirming an International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) arbitration award in favor of Devas.

Devas Mauritius Ltd., Devas Employees Mauritius Private Ltd., and Devas Multimedia America, Inc. had intervened collectively to register the judgment in the Eastern District of Virginia.

The order of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit states categorically: “We hold that the district court erred in exercising personal jurisdiction over Antrix”

The three companion appeals were over an agreement between the two Indian corporations: Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. and Antrix Corp. Ltd. In the Confirmation Appeal, Antrix challenged the district court’s orders denying its motion to dismiss and confirming an International Chamber of Commerce arbitration award in favour of Devas. In the Registration Appeals, Antrix and Devas challenged the district court’s order granting the motion of CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd., Telcom Devas Mauritius Ltd., Devas Employees Mauritius Private Ltd., and Devas Multimedia America, Inc. (collectively “Intervenors”) to register the judgment in the Eastern District of Virginia.

The district court erroneously concluded that a minimum contacts analysis was unnecessary to exercise personal jurisdiction over Antrix. Personal jurisdiction over a foreign state in a civil action is governed by the long-arm provision of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”). Under the FSIA, a foreign state “shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States” unless an enumerated exception applies.

The FSIA also provides that “persona jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist as to every claim for relief over which the district courts have jurisdiction under subsection (a) where service has been made under section 1608 of this title.” And the parties agree that for purposes of the FSIA, Antrix is a “foreign state,” service has been made, and an enumerated exception applies.

The order further says that district court also erred in concluding that Antrix has the requisite minimum contacts with the United States.  It goes on to add Devas has failed to meet its burden under the first prong to show that Antrix purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the United States. Devas primarily relies on the Antrix and Indian Space Research Organization Chairman’s 2003 visit to Washington D.C. to meet with Forge Advisors and a series of 2009 meetings between ISRO officials and the Devas team. Assuming that ISRO’s contacts with the United States may be attributed to Antrix, these meetings are still insufficient because they are not purposeful, but rather “random, isolated, or fortuitous.”

The Agreement between Antrix and Devas was negotiated outside of the United States, executed in India in 2005, and did not require Antrix to conduct any activities or create ongoing obligations in the United States, the order points out adding the district court erred in holding that Antrix had the requisite minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction.

Also the order states: “Because we hold that the district court erred in exercising personal jurisdiction over Antrix, its judgment is reversed, and we need not address any of the other issues raised in the Confirmation Appeal. Because there is no judgment to register, the district court’s order permitting Intervenors to register the judgment in the Eastern District of Virginia is also reversed, and we need not address any of the issues raised by the Registration Appeals.”

Shareholders of Devas Multimedia can enforce the $1.3 billion International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award in any jurisdiction in US if they could provide evidence of assets owned by Antrix Corporation, ruled United States District Court of Eastern Virginia. The US Court had ordered Intelsat to deliver a cheque worth that amount to Devas Multimedia in its June 29, 2022 order. Intelsat owed this amount to the government-owned space company Antrix.

CHECK Devas scam