×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Foreign Fugitive Awards May Fall Under FSIA’S Commercial Activity Sovereign Immunity Exception
Foreign Fugitive Awards May Fall Under FSIA'S Commercial Activity Sovereign Immunity Exception
Jose Guevara filed suit against the Republic of Peru and two Peruvian officials in 2001 for failure to fulfill a contract. The suit was removed from the Eleventh Judicial District of Florida to U.S. District Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d). The district court held that sovereign immunity applied and dismissed all claims; the dismissal was reversed and remanded on appeal to decide jurisdiction.
In 2001, the FBI tracked Guevara to Miami and offered him a deal. If he gave accurate information resulting in the capture of fugitive Vladimiro Montesinos, ex advisor to the Peruvian President and former head of the Peruvian intelligence service, they would drop the charges against him. They also reminded Guevara of the $5 million reward Peru offered for the capture of Montesinos. Guevara delivered Montesinos, but Peru refused to pay the reward.
Guevara filed suit against the Republic of Peru and both the former and current Ministers of the Interior, claiming breech of contract, breech of contract implied in law, fraudulent inducement and fraudulent misrepresentation. The defendants' motion to dismiss was granted based on § 1602 11 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and lack of jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1604.
On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held that under FSIA's § 1604 general grant of immunity for foreign governments, the exception for commercial activity was at issue. Further, while disagreeing with the dismissal under the FSIA, as exchange of money for information is "commercial in nature," the Eleventh Circuit held that the district court should have the first opportunity to resolve the issue. See: Guevara v. Republic of Peru, 468 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2006).
Jose Guevara filed suit against the Republic of Peru and two Peruvian officials in 2001 for failure to fulfill a contract. The suit was removed from the Eleventh Judicial District of Florida to U.S. District Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d). The district court held that sovereign immunity applied and dismissed all claims; the dismissal was reversed and remanded on appeal to decide jurisdiction.
In 2001, the FBI tracked Guevara to Miami and offered him a deal. If he gave accurate information resulting in the capture of fugitive Vladimiro Montesinos, ex advisor to the Peruvian President and former head of the Peruvian intelligence service, they would drop the charges against him. They also reminded Guevara of the $5 million reward Peru offered for the capture of Montesinos. Guevara delivered Montesinos, but Peru refused to pay the reward.
Guevara filed suit against the Republic of Peru and both the former and current Ministers of the Interior, claiming breech of contract, breech of contract implied in law, fraudulent inducement and fraudulent misrepresentation. The defendants' motion to dismiss was granted based on § 1602 11 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and lack of jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1604.
On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held that under FSIA's § 1604 general grant of immunity for foreign governments, the exception for commercial activity was at issue. Further, while disagreeing with the dismissal under the FSIA, as exchange of money for information is "commercial in nature," the Eleventh Circuit held that the district court should have the first opportunity to resolve the issue. See: Guevara v. Republic of Peru, 468 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2006).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Guevara v. Republic of Peru
| Year | 2006 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 468 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2006) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
| Injunction Status | N/A |