Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical

When interpreting a foreign law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1, a federal court must "accord respectful consideration" to a foreign government’s interpretation of the law, but is not bound by this interpretation.

Petitioners, U.S. purchasers of vitamin-C, claimed that Respondents, Chinese manufacturers and exporters of the vitamin, violated §1 of the Sherman Act by agreeing to fix prices and restrain supply. Respondents argued that they were not subject to U.S. antitrust regulations because, under Chinese law, they were required to fix prices and limit exports. The Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China (Ministry) filed an amicus brief supporting Respondent’s motion to dismiss. Despite the Ministry’s explanation of the Chinese pricing regime, the district court denied the motion, and a jury held in favor of Petitioners. The Second Circuit reversed, holding that when a foreign government offers a construction of its own law, the federal courts are bound to that construction if it is reasonable. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that a federal court interpreting foreign law under FRCP 44.1 must accord “respectful consideration” to a foreign government’s interpretation of their own law, but is not required to give a foreign government’s statement conclusive effect. Further, when interpreting a foreign law, the court should consider the context and intent of the law, the transparency of the foreign legal system, the authority of the entity issuing the statement, and the consistency of the foreign government’s past decisions.