The Office of the President reports that the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has vacated an order of a federal judge that obliged the Dominican Government and the National Institute of Hydraulic Resources to pay more than US$50 million to the Florida companies Sun Land & RGITC, LLC and Architectural Ingenieria Siglo XXI, LLC. The decision is related to the Azua I and II irrigation projects dating back from 2002 to 2010 during the Hipolito Mejia and Leonel Fernandez administrations.
Plaintiffs Sun Land & RGITC LLC and Architectural Ingenieria Siglo XXI, LLC sued Defendants Dominican Republic and INDRHI for breach of contract and unjust enrichment related to irrigation projects in the Dominican Republic. The decision revokes an initial district court default judgment in favor of Sun Land and Architectural that awarded damages that cumulatively exceeded US$50 million. The judge ordered the award because it was determined that the Dominican government and INDRHI did not answer the complaint presented by the companies in a timely manner. The decision was issued on 10 June 2015. The Dominican government was represented by Holland & Knight and Dr. Jorge Guerrero of Guerrero Law Firm. The lawyers were able to convince the three federal judges that the Dominican government and the INDRHI had worthy defense arguments and if they did not present them on time it was due to an administrative error and not because of any intent not to present their defense.
As reported on Justia website:
“Plaintiffs filed suit against the Dominican Republic and INDRHI for breach of contract and unjust enrichment related to an irrigation project in the Dominican Republic. After the district court entered a default judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendants moved to vacate the default judgment. The district court denied the motion and defendants appealed. While that appeal was pending, the Dominican Republic moved to vacate the default judgment for voidness under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4). The district court denied the motion on the merits, finding that the Dominican Republic had waived its sovereign immunity. The Dominican Republic appealed. In these consolidated appeals, the court concluded that the district court erred by denying the Dominican Republic’s Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate for voidness the default judgment entered against the foreign nation because at least one statutory exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. 1602-1611, applies; the district court abused its discretion by denying the Dominican Republic and INDRHI’s Rule 60(b)(1) motion to vacate for excusable neglect the default judgment entered against them because the factual findings underlying the district court’s decision were unsupported by the record; and therefore, the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.”
Corte de EE.UU afirma RD no debe US$50 millones a Sun Land /Siglo 21
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/13-13877/13-13877-2015-06-10.html
http://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca11/13-13877/13-13877-2015-06-10.pdf?ts=1433970078