Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-401_2cp3.pdf
Page Number: 16

12 

ZF AUTOMOTIVE US, INC. v. LUXSHARE, LTD. 

Opinion of the Court 

Luxshare’s dispute with ZF is straightforward.  Private par-
ties agreed in a private contract that DIS, a private dispute-
resolution  organization,  would  arbitrate  any  disputes  be-
tween them.  See Stolt-Nielsen, 559 U. S., at 682 (“[A]n ar-
bitrator derives his or her powers from the parties’ agree-
ment to forgo the legal process and submit their disputes to
private dispute resolution”).  By default, DIS panels operate
under DIS rules, just like panels of any other private arbi-
tration  organization  operate  under  private  arbitral  rules. 
The panels are formed by the parties—with each party se-
lecting one arbitrator and those two arbitrators choosing a 
third.  No government is involved in creating the DIS panel 
or prescribing its procedures.  This adjudicative body there-
fore does not qualify as a governmental body.

Luxshare  weakly  suggests  that  a  commercial  arbitral
panel like the DIS panel qualifies as governmental so long
as the law of the country in which it would sit (here, Ger-
many) governs some aspects of arbitration and courts play
a  role  in  enforcing  arbitration  agreements.    See  Brief  for 
Respondent in No. 21–401, at 26–27; Boeing, 954 F. 3d, at 
213–214.  But private entities do not become governmental 
because  laws  govern  them  and  courts  enforce  their  con-
tracts—that  would  erase  any  distinction  between  private
and governmental adjudicative bodies.  Luxshare’s implau-
sibly broad definition of a governmental adjudicative body 
is nothing but an attempted end run around §1782’s limit. 

B 
The ad hoc arbitration panel at issue in the Fund’s dis-
pute with Lithuania presents a harder question.  A sover-
eign is on one side of the dispute, and the option to arbitrate
is contained in an international treaty rather than a private 
contract.  These factors, which the Fund emphasizes, offer 
some support for the argument that the ad hoc panel is in-
tergovernmental.  Yet neither Lithuania’s presence nor the