In Martinez v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 86 A.3d 1102  (Del. 2014) (No. 669, 2012), plaintiffs residing in Argentina brought suit in Delaware to recover damages for injuries sustained by them or their family members as a result of exposure to asbestos on the job in Argentina.  The trial court had dismissed on several grounds, including the forum non conveniens doctrine.  The Delaware Supreme Court addressed that issue, noting that Argentine law controlled the rights of the parties, and that the case raised several important issues of first impression under Argentine law, which the court opined should be addressed by an Argentine court in the first instance.  The Delaware Supreme Court also observed that its ability to address such questions was severely hampered by the fact that Argentine law is set forth in Spanish.  Furthermore, the court held that plaintiffs who did not live in Delaware, whose injuries did not occur in Delaware, and whose claims are not governed by Delaware law have a less substantial interest in having a Delaware forum resolve their claims. As a consequence, the court affirmed the dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds