• PRO
  • Events
  • Awards
    • Client Choice New
    • Influencers
    Introducing Instruct Counsel
    The next generation search tool for finding the right lawyer for you.
  • About
  • Blog Popular
  • Login
  • Register
  • PRO
  • Resources
    • Latest updates
    • Commentary
    • Q&A
    • Analysis
    • Practical resources
    • In-depth
    • FromCounsel
    • In-house view
  • Research tools
    • Global research hub
    • Lexy
    • Primary sources
    • Scanner
    • Research reports
    • Instruct Counsel
  • Resources
  • Research tools
  • Who's Who Legal
    • Find an expert
    • Reports
    • Thought Leaders
    • Performance Index
    • Research methodology
  • Who's Who Legal
  • Learn
    • All
    • Masterclasses
    • Videos
  • Learn
  • Awards
  • My newsfeed
  • Events
  • About
  • Blog
  • Popular
  • Compare
  • Topics
  • Interviews
  • Guides

Analytics

Review your content's performance and reach.

  • Analytics dashboard
  • Top articles
  • Top authors
  • Who's reading?

Content Development

Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics.

  • Trending Topics
  • Discover Content
  • Horizons
  • Ideation

Client Intelligence

Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing.

  • Track Sectors
  • Track Clients
  • Mandates
  • Discover Companies
  • Reports Centre

Competitor Intelligence

Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them.

  • Benchmarking
  • Competitor Mandates
Home

Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.

Find out more about Lexology or get in touch by visiting our About page.

Register

10 Things to Know: US Allows Lawsuits Relating to “Trafficking” in Confiscated Property in Cuba

Latham & Watkins LLP

To view this article you need a PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader

If you can't read this PDF, you can view its text here. Go back to the PDF .

Cuba, USA May 3 2019

Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in France, Hong Kong, Italy, Singapore, and the United Kingdom and as an affiliated partnership conducting the practice in Japan. Latham & Watkins operates in South Korea as a Foreign Legal Consultant Office. Latham & Watkins works in cooperation with the Law Office of Salman M. Al-Sudairi in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Under New York’s Code of Professional Responsibility, portions of this communication contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each representation. Please direct all inquiries regarding our conduct under New York’s Disciplinary Rules to Latham & Watkins LLP, 885 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-4834, Phone: +1.212.906.1200. © Copyright 2019 Latham & Watkins. All Rights Reserved.

Latham & Watkins Export Controls, Economic Sanctions & Customs

Practice

10 Things to Know: US Allows Lawsuits Relating to

Trump Administration breaks with precedent to allow US plaintiffs to bring “traffickingâ€

suits under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act.

Title III of the Helms-Burton Act (the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996)

(the Act) allows US citizens to sue persons who “traffic†in property expropriated by the Cuban

government. Title III includes a waiver used by US Presidents since 1996 to suspend every six months

this private right of action.

On April 17, 2019, the Trump Administration announced that it would allow US citizens to bring suit under

Title III, effective May 2, 2019. This announcement followed a 45-day partial suspension of the right of

action under Title III, which authorized suits against Cuban entities identified on the US Department of

State’s List of Restricted Entities and Sub-Entities Associated with Cuba (known as the Cuba Restricted

List). This policy shift impacts both US and non-US persons and companies that conduct business in or

involving Cuba.

Below are answers to 10 key questions about Title III and the end of its private right of action suspension.

1. What is Title III of the Helms-Burton Act?

Title III provides US citizens with a private cause of action in federal court against any person that

knowingly traffics in property confiscated by the Cuban government on or after January 1, 1959. Under

the circumstances described below, plaintiffs may seek damages for the full value of their confiscated

property (which can include debts, forms of intellectual property, and real and personal property) in

addition to potential treble damages.

2. What stopped US citizens from previously suing under Title III?

Since the enactment of the Act, every US President has suspended the private right of action under Title

III, generally due to concerns of provoking US allies whose nationals could be subject to suit in federal

courts and fear of retaliatory trade-related legal claims against the United States.

Nonetheless, a number of US citizens secured “certified†claims relating to confiscated property. Title V of

the International Claims Settlement Act authorizes the US Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (the

FCSC or the Commission) to consider claims of US nationals arising from the nationalization,

expropriation, intervention, or other taking of, or special measures directed against, their property, by the

Latham & Watkins May 3, 2019 | Number 2497 | Page 2

Cuban government and others. Between 1967 and 1972 (the first Cuban Claims Program), and again

between 2005 and 2006 (the Second Cuban Claims Program), the FCSC evaluated claims of US

nationals regarding property confiscated during the Cuban revolution. Under the first Cuban Claims

Program, the Commission certified 5,911 claims as compensable with a total principal value of over

US$1.85 billion. The second Cuban Claims Program resulted in two certified claims with a total principal

amount of approximately US$51.14 million. Successful claimants have not been able to “enforce†their

claims in US courts until now.

3. Can a US citizen sue under Title III without a certified claim from the FCSC?

The Act prohibits US nationals who were entitled to bring claims before the Commission, but did not, from

commencing an action under Title III. Individuals who were not US nationals during the two Cuban Claims

Programs (and therefore not eligible to file a claim before the Commission), but who have since become

naturalized US citizens, can file suit under Title III.

The FCSC’s adjudications are relevant to Title III actions in other ways. The Act provides a presumption

in favor of the valuation of an FCSC-certified claim, a presumption that is rebuttable by clear and

convincing evidence. Courts must also accept as conclusive the proof of ownership in a certified claim.

Finally, courts must accept as conclusive a decision by the FCSC to deny a claim brought before the

Commission.

As of May 2, 2019, US citizens who have certified claims may file suit under Title III. Plaintiffs who are

asserting expropriation claims not previously certified will need to provide 30 days’ notice of a suit to seek

treble damages. Plaintiffs must demonstrate that the “amount in controversy†has a valuation of

US$50,000 or greater, exclusive of interest.

4. What does it mean to “traffic†in confiscated property?

Title III defines “trafficking†to apply to a party that knowingly and intentionally, without authorization of

any US national who holds a claim to the property:

(i) sells, transfers, distributes, dispenses, brokers, manages, or otherwise disposes of confiscated

property, or purchases, leases, receives, possesses, obtains control of, manages, uses, or otherwise

acquires or holds an interest in confiscated property;

(ii) engages in a commercial activity using or otherwise benefiting from confiscated property; or

(iii) causes, directs, participates in, or profits from, trafficking by another person, or otherwise engages

in trafficking through another person.

Given that Title III has been suspended since 1996, how US courts will interpret this definition (and Title

III generally) is uncertain.

5. Who can be sued in a Title III action?

US plaintiffs can sue corporations or individuals currently trafficking in confiscated property, or who have

done so in the prior two years. As a practical matter, defendants with little or no US presence may be able

to dismiss suits brought under Title III on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction. Depending on

economic and commercial relationships, the US subsidiaries of foreign parent companies that deal in

confiscated property could qualify as profiting from the trafficking of their foreign affiliates, though these

types of jurisdictional issues will surely be subject to litigation.

Latham & Watkins May 3, 2019 | Number 2497 | Page 3

6. Are there exceptions for persons or companies from any specific countries?

No, but there are limitations in the statute that appear to exempt certain activities from suit. For instance,

the Act provides that a person’s involvement in the delivery of international telecommunications, trading of

securities publicly held or traded, or use of property incident to and necessary to lawful travel to Cuba,

does not constitute “trafficking†under the statute and so does not form the basis for a claim.

7. Who is most likely to be affected by the lifting of the suspension?

Companies involved in the travel, hospitality, transportation, telecom, mining, and industrial sectors in

Cuba are likely to be most exposed to Title III suits. (While the United State has maintained an economic

and trade embargo against Cuba for several decades, these measures would not reach non-US

companies that are not owned or controlled by a US person.) Multinational companies with assets in or

that conduct business activities within the US may be at greater risk of exposure to suit as a result of a

US jurisdictional nexus.

8. Does a US person need a license from the US government to sue under Title III?

No. The Act provides that US citizens may bring suit under Title III against the Cuban government without

licensing from the US government. It also provides that an action may be brought and settled, and a

related judgment enforced, without US Government authorization.

9. Will other countries take action to protect their citizens from Title III lawsuits?

The European Union (EU), Canada, and Mexico have stated that they will defend the interests of their

companies and citizens conducting lawful trade and investment with Cuba. One or more of these

countries could initiate a World Trade Organization (WTO) action to defend the interests of their citizens

in Cuba. (The EU initiated WTO proceedings in 1996, which were later withdrawn.)

Several countries have laws that could render judgments arising from the Act unenforceable and inhibit

discovery in connection with Title III actions. Non-US companies could use such laws to protect

themselves against Title III litigation. For example, the Council Regulation (EC) No. 2271/96 of the EU

(the Blocking Statute) provides that judgments giving effect to the Act shall not be recognized or enforced

within the EU, and limits compliance requirements with discovery requests related to Title III suits.

In addition, Article 6 of the Blocking Statute entitles EU operators to bring legal proceedings in the courts

of EU Member States to recover “damages, including legal costs, caused by the application of the laws

specified in [the Blocking Statute] or by actions based thereon or resulting therefrom.†The EU Guidance

Note explains that the scope of damages that can be claimed is deliberately broad to provide EU

operators with the greatest possible protection. Accordingly, EU operators that are sued in the US courts

and forced to pay damages under Title III could rely on the Blocking Statute to recover those sums

through separate court proceedings. Canada’s Foreign Extraterritorial Measures (United States) Order,

1992 (the Order), issued under the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act (FEMA), likewise makes it an

offense for Canadian corporations to comply with the US laws against Cuba. The Attorney General of

Canada can issue orders that mandate non-recognition of judgements under the Act and restrict

discovery attempts in connection with Title III suits. Mexico also has a so-called antidote law that prohibits

providing information to foreign authorities or courts prosecuting Title III suits, among other provisions.

10. How can a foreign company prepare for a potential lawsuit under Title III?

Companies that have been doing business directly or indirectly with or in Cuba during the last two years

can take steps now to assess potential exposure under the Act and to consider the issues and defenses

that may arise in litigation. For instance, parties should consider:

Latham & Watkins May 3, 2019 | Number 2497 | Page 4

ï‚· Searching FCSC claims for points of exposure

ï‚· Conducting diligence on properties relevant to their Cuban dealings for other evidence of historical expropriation

 Reviewing commercial relationships for risks of “trafficking†claims and evaluating mitigation and termination options

ï‚· Reviewing and strengthening contractual clauses to address associated risks

If you have questions about this Client Alert, please contact one of the authors listed below or the Latham

lawyer with whom you normally consult:

Les P. Carnegie

[email protected] +1.202.637.1096 Washington, D.C.

Charles Claypoole

[email protected] +44.20.7710.1178 London

William M. McGlone

[email protected] +1.202.637.2202 Washington, D.C.

Robert E. Sims

[email protected] +1.415.395.8127 San Francisco

Eric S. Volkman

[email protected] +1.202.637.2237 Washington, D.C.

Annie E. S. Froehlich

[email protected] +1.202.637.2375 Washington, D.C.

Sarah M. Gragert

[email protected] +1.202.637.3368 Washington, D.C.

Elizabeth K. Annis*

[email protected] +1.202.637.1011 Washington, D.C.

Andrew Galdes

[email protected] +1.202.637.2155 Washington, D.C. Bridget Reineking

[email protected] +1.202.637.1015 Washington, D.C.

Robert Price

[email protected] +44.20.7710.4682 London

*Admitted to practice in California only.

You Might Also Be Interested In

OFAC Imposes Comprehensive Sanctions on Venezuela’s State Oil Company, PdVSA

The Trump Administration’s New Venezuela Sanctions: Top 10 Takeaways

Top 10 Things to Know About Expanded US Sanctions on Iran

Cuba & Trump: What the Changes Mean

Latham & Watkins May 3, 2019 | Number 2497 | Page 5

Client Alert is published by Latham & Watkins as a news reporting service to clients and other friends.

The information contained in this publication should not be construed as legal advice. Should further

analysis or explanation of the subject matter be required, please contact the lawyer with whom you

normally consult. The invitation to contact is not a solicitation for legal work under the laws of any

jurisdiction in which Latham lawyers are not authorized to practice. A complete list of Latham’s Client

Alerts can be found at www.lw.com. If you wish to update your contact details or customize the

information you receive from Latham & Watkins, visit https://www.sites.lwcommunicate.com/5/178/forms-

english/subscribe.asp to subscribe to the firm’s global client mailings program.

This article is made available by Latham & Watkins for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. Your receipt of this communication alone creates no attorney client relationship between you and Latham & Watkins. Any content of this article should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your jurisdiction.

Latham & Watkins LLP - Les P. Carnegie, William M. McGlone, Eric S. Volkman, Sarah M. Gragert, Andrew P. Galdes, Bridget R. Reineking, Charles Claypoole, Robert E. Sims, Annie E. S. Froehlich , Elizabeth K. Annis and Robert Price

Back Forward
  • Save & file
  • View original
  • Forward
  • Share
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Linked In
  • Follow
    Please login to follow content.
  • Like
  • Instruct

add to folder:

  • My saved (default)
  • Read later
Folders shared with you

Filed under

  • Cuba
  • USA
  • Company & Commercial
  • Litigation
  • Real Estate
  • Trade & Customs
  • Latham & Watkins LLP

Organisations

  • Office of Foreign Assets Control (USA)

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected].

Powered by Lexology
Lexology Live: European Counsel Summit 2023
Gain practical takeaways on ESG strategy from in-house leaders on 27 June 2023
View the agenda

Related practical resources PRO

  • How-to guide How-to guide: Business and legal developments related to climate change (USA) Recently updated
  • How-to guide How-to guide: How to draft and negotiate an exclusion and limitation of liability clause (UK) Recently updated
  • Checklist Checklist: What to consider when reviewing or drafting a contract for the international sale and supply of goods (UK) Recently updated
View all

Related research hubs

  • Office of Foreign Assets Control (USA)
  • USA
  • Trade & Customs
  • Litigation
Back to Top
Resources
  • Daily newsfeed
  • Commentary
  • Q&A
  • Research hubs
  • Learn
  • In-depth
  • Lexy: AI search
  • Scanner
Who's Who Legal
  • Find an expert
  • Reports
  • Thought Leaders
  • Performance Index
  • Research methodology
  • Instruct Counsel
More
  • About us
  • Legal Influencers
  • Firms
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Popular
Legal
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
Contact
  • Contact
  • RSS feeds
  • Submissions
 
  • Login
  • Register
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Follow on LinkedIn

© Copyright 2006 - 2023 Law Business Research

Law Business Research