Supreme Court Rules Narrowly on Foreign Arbitration Awards (1)

The US Supreme Court revived a more than $500 million arbitration award involving two Indian companies, saying that the lower federal court was wrong to impose additional requirements not in the statute.

Writing for a unanimous court Thursday, Justice Samuel Alito said the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act doesn’t require a showing of a connection to the US in order to justify intervention by US courts.

Instead, the statute requires only that a court has subject matter jurisdiction, which is provided by the statute, and that service was proper. After those two requirements are met, “personal jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign is automatic,” Alito said.

The FSIA sets forth when foreign-owned companies can be sued in the US. One of the two companies is owned by the Indian government. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed the case satisfied the explicit requirements of FSIA, but said more was required, specifically a sufficient connect to the US.

Rejecting that view, the court said it wouldn’t add to Congress’ work. The “FSIA was supposed to ‘clarify the governing standards,’ not hide the ball,” the court said.

In reviving the suit, the justices sidestepped the question of whether the Constitution, as opposed to FSIA, might impose the additional requirement.

During arguments in March, the justices anticipated the constitutional question might soon make its way back to the Supreme Court, and the court said the parties are free to litigate that issue on remand.

The case is CC/Devas (Mauritius) Limited v. Antrix Corp. Ltd., U.S., No. 23-1201, 6/5/25.