The Boesch Law Group Takes on the Judgment Obtained by a Chinese Government-Owned Company
In a case with international implications involving breach of contract and interference with contractual relationships, the Boesch Law Group achieved an important milestone on March 24, 2015, when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in favor of Folex Industries, a California corporation and a client of the Boesch Law Group. The legal question was whether a Chinese court ruling obtained by a Chinese government-owned company should be enforced in the United States.
As U.S. trade and business transactions with Chinese companies have grown dramatically in the last few years, this case was closely watched by international law experts. “It would be unfair to all who do business with China,” Philip Boesch argued to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, “if Chinese government orders and decrees could just take away contracts and rights without due process of law.” Agreeing with Boesch’s arguments, the Ninth Circuit held that the Chinese judgment against Folex was not enforceable, that service of the Chinese lawsuit was improper, and that the Chinese court did not properly assume jurisdiction over Folex. The Ninth Circuit additionally agreed with Mr. Boesch, that even if there had been effective service of the Chinese lawsuit, non-parties to the judgment cannot enforce the Judgment because non-parties in China do not have such rights.
The winning Ninth Circuit argument can be viewed below:
DISCLAIMER: The materials on this website are for general information purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice, legal opinion or any other advice on any specific facts or circumstances. Readers should not act or refrain from acting upon this information without seeking professional advice.
Transmission of information on or by use of this website is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship between the sender and receiver. Such communications will not be treated as confidential. Photographs and other graphics may be for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.