Citgo Petroleum Corporation v. Ascot Underwriting Limited
Citgo Petroleum Corporation v. Ascot Underwriting Limited, for and on behalf of Lloyd's Syndicate 1414
- Gregory Woods
- 1:21-cv-00389
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Citgo Petroleum v. Starstone Insurance, Judge Woods ordered briefing on Venezuelan-law questions about Guaidó’s presidency and a Caracas court order.
Citgo Petroleum Corporation and the defendants identified in the opinion’s caption, including Starstone Insurance SE; the order requires the parties to submit briefing and translations.
What happened
In Citgo Petroleum Corporation v. Starstone Insurance SE, et al., the court addressed two issues involving Venezuelan law: when President Guaidó’s presidency began and the validity and effect of an alleged Caracas criminal-court order.
The court said it would decide those issues as legal questions. It asked the parties to brief the interpretation of Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution and the legal status of the alleged court order, with English translations of relevant Venezuelan legal materials when needed.
The court ordered the parties’ briefs by November 17, 2023, and any replies by November 21, 2023. Judge Gregory H. Woods did not resolve the two legal questions in this order.
The detailed version
- Citgo Petroleum Corporation v. Ascot Underwriting Limited · No. 1:21-cv-00389
- Gregory Woods
- Nov. 14, 2023
What the Order Concerns
The court was considering pretrial briefing about two Venezuelan-law issues. First, it requested briefing on when President Guaidó’s presidency began under Venezuelan law, including the proper interpretation of Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution. Second, it requested briefing on the legal validity, legitimacy, and effect of an alleged “court order” issued by a Caracas criminal court.
Court’s Treatment of the Issues
The court stated that the validity, legitimacy, and effect of the alleged Venezuelan court order are questions of law reserved for the court. It also stated that the timing of President Guaidó’s presidency is a foreign-law question to the extent it requires interpreting the Venezuelan Constitution or other Venezuelan laws. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1, a federal court’s determination of foreign law is treated as a ruling on a question of law, although the court may use procedures resembling fact-finding.
Order
The court requested briefing on both issues. It directed the parties to provide English translations, along with the original Spanish versions, of Venezuelan laws, statutes, or constitutional provisions that the court would need to understand or interpret. The parties’ briefs were due no later than November 17, 2023, and any replies were due no later than November 21, 2023. The order did not decide the underlying Venezuelan-law questions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.