28 U.S.C. § 1607
Counterclaims
2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–181 inserted “or 1605A” after “section 1605”.
For applicability of amendments by Pub. L. 110–181 to pending cases, see section 1083(c) of Pub. L. 110–181, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1605A of this title.
Section effective 90 days after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior De Cuba
First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior De Cuba (1983)
“Bancec correctly concedes that, under 28 U. S. C. § 1607 (c), [7] an instrumentality of a foreign state bringing suit in a United States court is not entitled to immunity "with respect to any counterclaim .”
Doe v. See (2009)
“Jurisdiction in Bancec existed under FSIA's counterclaim provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1607 (c). [7] Id. at 620-21 , 103 S.”
Broidy Capital Management LLC v. Nicolas Muzin (2023)
“20–21 (citing 28 U.S.C. §§ 1607 , 1605(a)(1)). Under our precedent, Qatar’s hesitation to intervene—while understandable given the immunity protections at stake—is unfounded.”
Republic of Ecuador v. ChevronTexaco Corp. (2005)
“The sole exception claimed by Defendants to be applicable to this case is 28 U.S.C. § 1607 (b), known as “the counterclaim exception to the FSIA,” Cabiri, 165 F.”
Bawol Cabiri and Efua Cabiri v. Government of the Republic of Ghana (1999)
“On appeal, the Cabiris argue that Ghana lacks sovereign immunity (i) as to all of their claims, by virtue of the counterclaim exception to the FSIA, 28 U.S.C. § 1607 (1994), (ii) as to Efua Cabiri’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, by virtue of the FSIA’s…”
Alexander Khochinsky v. Republic of Poland (2021)
“28 U.S.C. § 1607 . Those three categories include, as relevant here, a counterclaim “arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the claim of the foreign state.”
In Re Balbir Singh Tuli, Debtor. Balbir Singh Tuli v. Republic of Iraq (1999)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 1607 . Section 1606 prescribes the extent of a foreign sovereign’s liability when it is not entitled to immunity under section 1605 or 1607.”
Saudi Basic Industries Corp. v. ExxonMobil Corp. (2002)
“According to SABIC, if Yanbu and ECAI wish to assert affirmative claims “arising out of the transaction or occurrence” as the subject matter of the Delaware action, they may only do so under 28 U.S.C. § 1607 (b). 28 U.S.C. § 1607 (b) provides that foreign states cannot assert…”
Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran (2007)
“Though Section 1604 also states that an exception to a foreign state's immunity can be found under 28 U.S.C. § 1607 , that provision governs counterclaims brought by a foreign state, which are not at issue here because the defendants have not made an appearance, let alone filed…”
In Re Oil Spill By\ Amoco Cadiz\" Off Coast of France" (1979)
“Although the “transactions or occurrences” issue arises under Rule 13 and 28 U.S.C. § 1607 , as stated above, federal policy, logic and common sense justify the application of the analysis to this issue.”
Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Phoenix International Software, Inc. (2011)
“had such claim been brought in a separate action against the foreign state; or (b) arising out of the transaction or ocv currence that is the subject matter of the claim of the foreign state; or (c) to the extent that the counterclaim does not seek relief exceeding in amount or…”
Banco Nacional De Cuba v. Chase Manhattan Bank (1980)
“Banco Nacional has defended in accordance with what may be characterized as at least five separate theories.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.