Ongoing Case Highlight: BAE Sys. Tech. Solution & Servs. v. Rep. of Korea's Def. Acquisition Prog. Admin., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168912 (D.Md. Dec. 7, 2016)

Summary:

This case is the same as the case covered in this previous post. While the Korean government was suing BAE Systems in Korea for failing to procure F-16 fighter jets as specified, BAE Systems sued Korea in the United States. After the motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens failed, Korea counterclaimed against the BAE Systems based on the same theory.

The court granted summary judgment against Korea's counterclaim, because the proper defendant for Korea's counterclaim was not BAE, but the U.S. government.

The court also dissolved the anti-suit injunction against the Korean government to pursue claims in Korean courts.

Takeaway:

Standing alone, this is not a terrible decision; on the merits, it is probably correct that Korea's counterclaim should be dismissed. But this case should not be before a U.S. court in the first place, based on lis pendens considerations. It is positive that the court dissolved the anti-suit injunction against Korea, but the issuance of that injunction in the beginning was as outrageous as anything I have seen in U.S. courts.