In Daimler v. Bauman, issued last term, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly limited the circumstances in which U.S. courts can exercise general jurisdiction over a corporate defendant, holding that absent exceptional circumstances, exercise of general jurisdiction over a corporate defendant is only proper in the forum where the defendant is organized or has its primary place of business.1 Relying on Daimler, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Gucci v. Li, that a foreign bank merely having a branch in a forum was not sufficient to warrant the exercise of general jurisdiction over the bank in that forum.2
Combined, the limited approach to general jurisdiction articulated in Daimler and Gucci suggest limits on plaintiffs’ ability to invoke the broad jurisdiction of U.S. courts—and with it the broad U.S.-style discovery—to prosecute claims against foreign financial institutions arising out of non-U.S.-based conduct.
