The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robert L. Carter, District Judge
Currently before the court is Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos, S.A.'s (hereinafter "AySA"), motion to dismiss and motion to stay the lawsuit pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens and Rule 12(b)(3), F.R. Civ. P.*fn1 For the reasons herein, the court grants defendant's motion to dismiss the lawsuit pursuant to forum non conveniens.
When deciding a motion to dismiss on the basis of improper venue, the "court must take all allegations in the complaint as true, unless contradicted by the defendants' affidavits. When an allegation is so challenged, a court may examine facts outside the complaint to determine whether venue is proper. The court must draw all reasonable inferences and resolve all factual conflicts in favor of the plaintiff." E.P.A. ex rel. McKeown v. Port Authority, 162 F. Supp. 2d 173, 183 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)(Pauley, J.)(citations omitted). The relevant facts are as follows. The government of Argentina decided to privatize the Buenos Aires water and sewer utility. It offered a thirty year concession to private companies to assume operation of the water and sewer system in Buenos Aires and its suburbs and to collect tariffs from customers. See Compl. ¶ 31. The Argentine government organized the international bidding process to grant the concession in 1992. Id. The winning consortium was composed of seven companies, which became Aguas's initial shareholders: two French companies, Suez S.A., and Compagnie Generale des Eaux S.A.; a Spanish company, Agbar; a British company, Anglican Water Plc; and three Argentine companies, Sociedad Comercial del Plata S.A., Meller S.A., and Banco de Galicia y Buenos Aires S.A. Aguas was formed by a public deed dated February 16, 1993. Aguas and Argentina entered into a concession agreement on April 28, 1993. On May 16, 1993, Aguas's incorporation was completed in Buenos Aires as a joint stock company with an initial corporate capital of $120,000,000. As a company incorporated under Argentine law with its registered seat in Buenos Aires, all business and corporate records are kept in Argentina.
The concession agreement provided that upon commencement of the concession, the Argentine government would permit Aguas to take possession of certain service assets, including treatment facilities, pipelines, commercial offices, and warehouses, for the purpose of fulfilling its obligations to provide water and sewage services.*fn3 Concession Agreement at 3.4 (Ex. 1). The concession agreement expressly stated that Aguas received no title to the service assets and would have no ownership rights.*fn4
In early 2002, Argentina passed Law N§.25.561, Ley de Emergencia Publica y de Reforma del Regimen Cambiario of January 6, 2002, and additional regulations that abolished the United States dollar-Argentine peso parity and any tariff indexation. In the following three months, the Argentine peso depreciated in value by seventy percent. The January 6, 2002 law abolished the adjustment of public service tariffs to reflect the increased costs. The law also imposed mandatory renegotiation with the Argentine government, which resulted in four years of negotiations between Aguas and the Argentine government.
In 2004, Aguas restructured its debt with its creditors. This agreement is contained in two interim financial agreements, or "IFAs." The IFAs contain express agreements to the following: 1) the agreements are governed by New York law; 2) the agents for service of process would be located in New York; 3) legal action arising out of these agreements may be brought in the courts of New York; 4) the parties waived objections based on forum non conveniens; 5) the parties may freely and unconditionally transfer, assign, or otherwise dispose of their rights to another; 6) there is a provision for enforceability of a New York judgment; and 7) the parties may acquire a waiver of sovereign immunity. See Pl.'s Mem. Opp. Mot. to Dismiss, at 10-11.
On July 26, 2005, Aguas initiated a contractually-established procedure for the termination of the concession, claiming that the Argentine state was not fulfilling its obligations under the concession. See Decl. Iriberri ¶ 13.
Aguas's termination notice was rejected by the Argentine government on December 22, 2005. Id.
Subsequently, Argentina issued Decree N§ 303/06, terminating its concession with Aguas on March 21, 2006. The government cited an alleged excess in the content of nitrates found in certain subterranean water sources located at the water sites as the cause of the termination. Id. at ¶ 14. On February 9, 2006, Aguas filed an action before the Argentine federal contentious administrative court N§ 8 in Buenos Aires seeking a judicial confirmation that its termination notice was valid. Id. at ¶ 17. It later amended this action to reflect the Argentine government's subsequent termination of the concession. The issue at stake at this proceeding, which is still pending before the Argentine court system, is a determination of which of the two parties is liable for the termination of the concession and the amount of termination compensation to be paid to Aguas. Id. at 18.
Following Aguas's termination from the concession, Argentina temporarily assumed operation of the sewage and water services that were provided by Aguas on March 21, 2006, the same day that Aguas's concession was terminated.*fn5 Argentina soon after incorporated a new entity, AySA, for the sole purpose of providing water and sewage services in the city of Buenos Aires. The water and sewage public service concession was then assigned to AySA. The Argentine government owns ninety percent of AySA's stock. AySA's employees own the remaining ten percent of its stock pursuant to an employee stock ownership program, which is statutorily mandated in Argentina. See Compl. ¶ 21. AySA used the facilities and water lines that both Aguas and the Argentine government possessed while providing the sewage and water services to the Buenos Aires area. Id. at ¶ 21.
After the concession was terminated by the Argentine government, Aguas filed for protection from its creditors on April 28, 2006. See Decl. Iriberri ¶ 25. The Aguas insolvency proceedings are currently pending before the commercial court N§ 17 in Buenos Aires. Id. at ¶ 27. Eleven unsecured lenders have filed claims against Aguas, in an aggregate principal amount of $123 million, arising out of the unsecured financial loans subject to this lawsuit. Id. at ¶ 26. The eleven creditors completed their filings in the Argentine proceeding on or before September 21, 2006. Id. at ¶ 27.
Plaintiff, Aguas Lenders Recover Group, LLC, ("ALRG"), is a New York limited liability company. Its members are the original and successor parties to loans made to Aguas. See Pl.'s Mem. Opp. Mot. to Dismiss, at 5. Plaintiff's members include entities organized under the laws of Delaware, Germany, the Cayman Islands, the British Virgin Islands, and the Bahamas. Id. On September 29, 2006, plaintiff's members assigned to it claims to unpaid amounts due and owing under financing agreements with Aguas. The purpose of ALRG is to "collect and/or take action with respect to Claims, including, but not limited to, disposing of, enforcing, voting, or otherwise dealing with or taking action with respect to, the Claims, including, without limitation, collecting, litigation, holding, selling, exchanging, settling litigation, or otherwise." Id. The assignment also authorized plaintiff "to continue to pursue" claims in Aguas's Argentine insolvency proceeding in the names of the individual members.
This lawsuit was initially brought against AySA, and two of Aguas's original shareholders, Suez and Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, on September 29, 2006-the same date as plaintiff's incorporation and its assignment to the relevant claims. The latter two defendants in the lawsuit subsequently settled their disputes with the plaintiff on October 24, 2007, and the claims against those parties were terminated on the same date.
As for the remaining claims, plaintiff argues that defendant is the successor in interest to Aguas, and therefore liable to plaintiff for Aguas's contractual and tortious violations to it. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that defendant is liable for the following: 1) breach of the Aguas loan facilities and IFAs as the successor in interest to Aguas; and ...