Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

Union Glory v. PDVSA , Memorandum Order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, January 18, 2024

18 Jan 2024
Union Glory Limited v. PDVSA Petroleo S.A. 
View case details
Memorandum Order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Memorandum Order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Arbitrator(s)
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Leonard P. Stark
Claimant's counsel
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's counsel
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Entities
PDVSA Petroleo, Petróleos de Venezuela, Union Glory Limited
Country
United States
Print reporter
Document Summary
Memorandum Order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Posture

This Memorandum Order, issued by the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, addresses unopposed Petitions to Recognize, Confirm, and Enforce Foreign Arbitration Awards filed by multiple petitioners against Respondent PDVSA Petroleo S.A. across five related actions. The petitioners previously filed motions to expedite consideration and submitted affidavits of service demonstrating that notice and an order to show cause were properly served upon the Respondent.

Court's Analysis and Decision

The Court observed that despite being served with an explicit order to show cause as to why the petitions should not be granted as unopposed, the Respondent failed to appear, file a responsive letter, or otherwise oppose the enforcement actions. Furthermore, counsel representing the Respondent's parent entity in related litigation explicitly confirmed they had not been retained for these specific actions.

Given the Respondent's failure to appear or object, the Court granted the Petitions to Recognize, Confirm, and Enforce the Foreign Arbitration Awards in all five actions. Consequently, the petitioners' motions to expedite consideration were denied as moot. The Court directed the petitioners to submit proposed judgment orders consistent with the Memorandum Order by January 22, 2024.