Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Merrill
Metalclad Corp. v. United Mexican States
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Metalclad Corporation, Plaintiff, is a United States corporation. Plaintiff created a Mexican subsidiary to build a hazardous-waste landfill in the Guadalcazar, a municipality located in the State of San Luis Potosi (State). Before Plaintiff purchased the subsidiary, the Mexican government, Defendant, and the State told Plaintiff that they would issue all the necessary permits for the landfill. Defendant issued the federal construction and operating permits for the landfill, and the State issued the state-operating permit. Despite the fact that locals opposed the project, the construction was finalized. Thereafter, Guadalcazar’s town council declined to issue a municipal construction permit because he claimed the project had adverse environmental impacts and that the location was not geologically proper for a landfill. Plaintiff was not previously notified of the council meeting. Plaintiff unsuccessfully tried to seek litigation in Mexican courts before initiating the arbitration proceeding against Defendant under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Plaintiff alleged that Guadalcazar did not have authority over hazardous-waste issues. On the contrary, Defendant claimed that Guadalcazar did have lawful authority to issue such permits.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.