Jurisdiction (Subject Matter)

• Author: International Law Group

Raphael Bigio and other members of his family (jointly "the Bigios") brought this action against the Coca-Cola Company and one of its subsidiaries to recover damages for the seizure of their assets in Egypt in 1962. The defendants allegedly knew about the seizure when they took possession of the premises in 1993.

The Bigio's alleged jurisdiction (1) under the Alien Tort Claims Act (28 U.S.C. Section 1350) (ATCA) and alternatively (2) based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. Section 1332. The district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, however, reverses and remands because the district court clearly has subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship (see 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(a)(2)). The Court expresses some doubt as to whether international comity might suggest that the U.S. court decline to exercise its jurisdiction.

First, ACTA provides that "[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." Here, the plaintiffs failed to allege that the defendants had taken part in the actions of the Egyptian government. Even though certain forms of individual conduct can violate the "law of nations," such as the bans on genocide and war crimes, the plaintiffs would have to show here that the defendants had worked hand-in-hand "under the color of law" with the Egyptian government in seizing the property. This does not come about simply by buying property from the government. Therefore, the defendants did not violate the law of nations and...