Science Applications International Corporation v. The Hellenic Republic

At a glance

Parties

Science Applications International Corporation (now Leidos, Inc.) v. the Hellenic Republic

Case no.

S.D.N.Y. No. 18 Misc. 327 (AT) (GWG); D.D.C. Civil Action No. 13-cv-1070 (GK)

Forum and rules

U.S. federal courts; New York Convention, Federal Arbitration Act, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (28 U.S.C. § 1610(c))

Treaty

New York Convention (Articles V(1)(e) and VI); no investment treaty

Court

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (judge not legibly named), 5 January 2017; U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Analisa Torres, District Judge, 24 April 2019

Underlying award(s)

ICC arbitration award of 2013 in favour of SAIC, rendered in arbitration held in Greece

Sector

Security systems; 2004 Athens Olympic Games

Outcome

The D.C. Court confirmed the award and refused a stay. The S.D.N.Y. Court later found that a reasonable period of time had passed under § 1610(c), so the creditor could move to attach Greek assets, even though annulment proceedings were still pending in Greece.

Amount

Award: EUR 39,818,298, USD 162,500 in arbitration costs, and interest. Final D.C. judgment (29 May 2018): EUR 47,933,905.64 plus USD 196,531.51 and post-judgment interest.

The dispute

In 2002 Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC, later renamed Leidos, Inc.) contracted with the Hellenic Republic to provide an operations security and support system for the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens. A dispute arose under the contract. SAIC filed an arbitration demand in 2006 and a further demand on 16 June 2009. In 2013 the ICC tribunal found for SAIC and ordered Greece to pay EUR 39,818,298, USD 162,500 in costs, and interest. SAIC sought to confirm and enforce the award in the United States. Greece applied in the Greek courts to annul the award and asked the U.S. courts to await the outcome, relying among other things on Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention after the Greek Supreme Court suspended enforcement of the award.

Key holdings

1. The D.C. Court refused to adjourn enforcement under Article VI of the New York Convention. Applying the Europcar factors, it found that the length of the dispute (almost 13 years) and the further years of Greek proceedings weighed strongly against a stay. D.D.C. Memorandum Opinion, pp. 5–7
2. The remaining factors also favoured enforcement. Nothing suggested that the Greek courts would apply a less deferential standard of review. Greece had brought the foreign proceedings to set the award aside, after the U.S. petition was filed. As a State with a treasury, Greece faced no hardship comparable to that of a private firm. The petition to confirm was granted. D.D.C. Memorandum Opinion, pp. 7–10
3. About eleven months had passed since the judgment of 29 May 2018. That is a "reasonable period of time" under 28 U.S.C. § 1610(c). Greece cited no case in which such a period had been held insufficient, and courts have accepted periods as short as six weeks. S.D.N.Y. Order, pp. 4–5
4. The pending Greek annulment action does not prevent a § 1610(c) finding. Thai-Lao Lignite concerned the validity of a judgment after the award had actually been annulled, which had not happened here. Section 1610(c) runs from the entry of judgment, not from a final, non-appealable judgment. S.D.N.Y. Order, pp. 5–6
5. Greece's argument under Article V(1)(e), based on the Greek Supreme Court's temporary suspension of the award, was in effect a request for a stay. The D.C. Court had already considered and refused such a stay, and under 28 U.S.C. § 1963 the S.D.N.Y. Court saw no reason to disturb that decision. S.D.N.Y. Order, pp. 6–7

Procedural history

1. 16 June 2009SAIC commenced arbitration in Greece, after an earlier arbitration demand in 2006.
2. 2013The ICC tribunal issued its award in favour of SAIC.
3. 12 July 2013SAIC petitioned the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to confirm the award.
4. 5 September 2013Greece filed an action in the Athens Court of Appeal to annul the award. The Athens Court of Appeal annulled it on 18 June 2014.
5. 22 September 2016The Greek Supreme Court reversed the annulment and remanded the case to the Athens Court of Appeal on a single issue.
6. 5 January 2017The D.C. Court granted the petition to confirm and refused a stay. Judgment was entered on 6 January 2017 for EUR 39,818,298; an amended USD 62,731,104.80 judgment followed on 18 April 2017.
7. 13 July 2017The Athens Court of Appeal dismissed Greece's annulment action. Greece appealed to the Greek Supreme Court on 14 March 2018, and that court suspended enforcement of the award pending its decision.
8. 29 May 2018After the D.C. Circuit held that the judgment should be in euros (Leidos, Inc. v. Hellenic Republic, 881 F.3d 213), the D.C. Court entered judgment for EUR 47,933,905.64 plus USD 196,531.51 and post-judgment interest.
9. 11 July 2018SAIC registered the judgment in the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1963. It moved for a § 1610(c) order on 22 October 2018.
10. 24 April 2019The S.D.N.Y. Court granted the motion, finding that a reasonable period of time had elapsed. The published documents do not show the outcome of Greece's pending appeal to the Greek Supreme Court.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

• Analisa Torres Judge, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Leidos
• SAIC
• Greece
• 2004 Athens Olympic Games
• security system
• ICC arbitration
• New York Convention
• Article V(1)(e)
• Article VI adjournment
• Europcar factors
• stay of enforcement
• Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
• 28 U.S.C. § 1610(c)
• reasonable period of time
• attachment and execution
• annulment
• Greek Supreme Court
• Thai-Lao Lignite
• enforcement

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.