Overview
Please click here to read the story on Law360 (subscription required).
Law360, New York (March 31, 2016, 4:07 PM ET) -- Steven K. Davidson is a litigation partner in the Washington, DC, office of Steptoe & Johnson LLP, where he is the head of the international arbitration practice group. For 30 years, Davidson has represented top Fortune 500 corporations, including ExxonMobil, Google, Motorola (now two companies), US Airways and others in various commercial, civil litigation in jurisdictions across the United States and abroad as well as in domestic, international and investor-state arbitrations. He is also a leader in worldwide enforcement of court judgments and arbitral awards, including provisional and prejudgment remedies.
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Steve Coll described Davidson in his book “Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power” as “one of the world’s leading specialists in the art of seizing and liquidating assets on behalf of large, aggrieved companies.” In connection with his work on behalf of ExxonMobil against Venezuela, Coll wrote: “For the Steptoe attorneys the late-December Friday afternoon seizure of $300 million belonging to Hugo Chavez’s government was like hitting a walk-off home run in the bottom of the ninth before a full house at Yankee Stadium.”
Q: What attracted you to international arbitration work?
A: Earlier in my career, I mostly did US domestic court trial work. Clients started to select international arbitration as a means of dispute resolution and I litigate in any forum my clients choose. International arbitration is an attractive forum for both the client and the lawyer. The client usually obtains a fair resolution with plenty of process. And for the most part, the tribunals are made up of experienced decision-makers and opposing counsel is likewise sophisticated and experienced, which increases the chances of professional and efficient litigation of the dispute. And, it is quite attractive for the lawyers to have a greater influence over the procedural and scheduling matters than in court proceedings.
Q: What are two trends you see that are affecting the practice of international arbitration?
A: The first trend is an increase in litigation financing for international arbitration, which I believe will increase the number of cases filed over the next 10 years. My personal view is that corporate entities and claimants finance their activities through various resources. The only difference here is that the claim is the asset being leveraged rather than other collateral in a more traditional line of credit.
The second trend is an increase in investor state litigation. If the prices of oil and natural gas continue to go down or remain low, it will place additional pressure on certain sovereigns to take more control over their economies and thus could lead to additional acts of expropriation or other discriminatory measures, including increased tax and regulations imposed against foreign investments. The third trend is generally the increased resort to international arbitration as a means of dispute resolution. In particular, you are seeing more and more parties agreeing to Singapore and Abu Dhabi as locations for arbitration.
Q: What is the most challenging case you’ve worked on and why?
A: The most challenging case was Motorola Credit Corp. v. Uzan,* which was a substantial cross-border dispute by Motorola against the Uzan family, who defrauded the company out of $2.13 billion. The dispute was litigated in multiple fora around the world, including the federal district court in Manhattan; the courts of England, Western Europe, and Middle Eastern countries; and the Caribbean. The case covered multiple jurisdictions and involved pre- and post-judgment seizure of assets. It was the most challenging and most rewarding case of my professional career.
*See Motorola Credit Corp. v. Uzan, 274 F. Supp. 2d 481 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). These judgments were affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. See Motorola Credit Corp. v. Uzan, 388 F.3d 39 (2d Cir. 2004).
Q: What advice would you give to an attorney considering a career in international arbitration?
A: The most important thing is to strive to be a great lawyer first and master overall litigation and trial skills. A great trial lawyer can try a case anywhere, including arbitration. If your interest is investor-state disputes, spend the time necessary to learn public international law — it will serve you well. Finally, a number of professional arbitrators take on clerks. This is an excellent opportunity, just like judicial clerkships, to gain keen exposure to international arbitration and learn from some of the best.
Q: Outside of your firm, name an attorney who has impressed you and tell us why.
A: Several practitioners/arbitrators come to mind: Larry Shore for his wit and intelligence and creativity; Professor Bernard Hanotiau, for his ability to cut to the central issue as an arbitrator; Tom Sprange for his strategic thinking, work ethic and litigation skill; Michael Goldberg, for his tenacity; Carolyn Lamm, for her depth of knowledge and experience; James Lloyd Loftis, for his strategic thinking; Thomas Rohner, a scholar, gentlemen and zealous advocate; Meriam Alrashid, for her entrepreneurial spirit and creativity; and Markus Wirth for his efficiency, judgment and even-handedness as an arbitrator.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
