Saturday, May 18, 2019
Spectrum Stores Inc, Plaintiffs – Appellants V. Citgo Petroleum Corporation; Saudi Arabian Oil Company, Doing Business as Saudi Aramco; Defendants – Appellees.
Case Brief Extra assign Citation SPECTRUM STORES INC, Plaintiffs Appellants v. CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY, doing business as Saudi Aramco Defendants Appellees. united STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. 632 F. 3d 938 (2011) Facts Gasoline retailers accused the OPEC fragment nations of fix pricing of bounderish embrocate and refined petroleum products in the US. The appellants argued that the district court mischaracterized their complaint as alleging a conspiracy among self-reliant nations to fix prices via production.They argued that the consolidated complaint alleges that commercial corporations, rather than governments, have taken over the production of crude cover. Under the act of state doctrine, the courts of one country will not sit in psyche on the acts of the government of an-other, done within its own territory. The appellees have met their burden of demonstrating that negotiation of this suit would ineluctably call into qu estion the acts of distant governments with respect to exploitation of their natural resources.The court barred the claims, and had to consider foreign policy of the political branches, which was not codified in a treaty that the court was merely asked to interpret. By judging the case, the panel would need to reexamine critical foreign policy decisions Issue Are the OPEC member nations oil companies committing just conspiracy by price fixing of crude oil and petroleum products in the US?Decision For the foregoing reasons, the United areas court declined to sit in ideal of the acts of the foreign states that comprise OPEC and urged that the district courts judgment of dismissal be affirmed. Reason The antitrust conspiracy alleged by plaintiffs arises from the Sovereign Acts of Foreign States. To rule for plaintiffs on their antitrust claims would require a court to rule on the legality of the Foreign Sovereign Acts of Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia. These cases do not foun ding the territorial limitation or a possible commercial activity exception of the Act of State Doctrine.