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

italaw180978 - Watkins v. Spain, Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, June 12, 2026.pdf

12 Jun 2026
 Watkins Holdings S.à r.l. and others v. Kingdom of Spain, ICSID Case No. ARB/15/44
View case details
Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,
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
Beryl A. Howell
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
Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales, Instituto Cervantes, Blasket Renewable Investments, Watkins Holdings, Spain
Country
United States
Print reporter
Document Summary
Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia,
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Context and Issues

This Memorandum and Order, issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, resolves two post-judgment discovery disputes arising from an action to enforce a confirmed ICSID arbitral award against the Kingdom of Spain. The petitioner, having obtained a final judgment, is seeking to identify attachable assets pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a)(2). The disputes concerned: (1) whether two Spanish state-owned entities, Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (“SEPI”) and Instituto Cervantes, could be subjected to direct party discovery as part of "Spain"; and (2) Spain's motion to quash third-party subpoenas served on its defense contractors, Raytheon and Palantir.

The Court's Rulings and Analysis

The Court first addressed the status of SEPI and Instituto Cervantes. It sustained Spain's objection to treating these juridically separate entities as part of the judgment debtor for discovery purposes. The Court reasoned that the petitioner had not yet met the burden of showing that the entities were alter egos of Spain or that Spain exercised sufficient control to compel their production of documents. The ruling was made without prejudice, allowing the petitioner to seek an alter ego finding via a motion to compel after conducting further discovery on the relationship between the entities and the state.

Second, the Court granted Spain's motion to quash the subpoenas directed to Raytheon and Palantir. While acknowledging the broad scope of post-judgment discovery, the Court invoked principles of comity owed to a foreign sovereign. It determined that the subpoenas, which sought highly sensitive information related to Spain's military and national security, should be deferred. The Court directed the petitioner to prioritize discovery of less sensitive assets to satisfy the judgment before pursuing information that implicates core sovereign interests. This decision was also granted without prejudice, permitting the petitioner to reissue the subpoenas if other avenues for satisfying the judgment prove insufficient.

Operative Orders

The Court ordered that Spain's objection regarding SEPI and Instituto Cervantes is sustained without prejudice. It further ordered that Spain's Motion to Quash the subpoenas to Raytheon and Palantir is granted without prejudice.