Raytheon Co. v. Indigo Systems Corp., Docket No. 16-1945

Conflict of laws: Forum non conveniens: Choice of law: Injunction:

Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp., 486 U.S. 140 (1988).

In Chick Kam Choo, the Supreme Court held that a federal district court that had previously dismissed claims on forum non conveniens and choice-of-law grounds could enjoin the plaintiffs from reasserting their Texas state law claims in state court. 486 U.S. at 150–51. The Supreme Court explained that such an injunction would be proper under the relitigation exception to the Anti-Injunction Act because the validity of the Texas law claim was adjudicated in the original federal action when the district court decided that under applicable choice-of-law principles, the law of Singapore, rather than Texas, controlled the petitioner’s suit. Id. at 150.

(U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, July 12, 2018, Raytheon Co. v. Indigo Systems Corp., Docket No. 16-1945 (2016-1945, 2016-2050), J. Chen)

Si une cour fédérale juge dans une affaire que la cour compétente est à l’étranger et que le droit applicable est un droit étranger, elle peut, par une injonction, prohiber la saisine subséquente d’une cour d’un état pour ce qui est de cette même affaire.