Waleed Nassar

In recent weeks, the world has been engulfed by the spread of COVID-19 as governments scramble to protect their citizens and avoid the collapse of public health systems and long-term damage to their economies. The wide-ranging efforts to flatten the curve of COVID-19 has created a tidal wave of ramifications for an international business community that is today more interconnected than ever, and led to high levels of uncertainty surrounding current and future contractual obligations. At a time when government policies fluctuate daily and courts and arbitration centers are becoming increasingly inaccessible to resolve active disputes, it is difficult for a party to seek or obtain interim measures or relief. From country to country and company to company, the responses have not been uniform: some commercial parties have continued to perform their obligations, while others have argued for wholesale abdication of their responsibilities, and still others are somewhere in between. Certain trends of government action and commercial response are emerging worldwide, no less so in the hyper-connected global businesses that are found in the Middle East.

LBKM partner Waleed Nassar has been recognized as a 2019 “Equality Trailblazer” by the National Law Journal in its inaugural list of top lawyers who serve as “agents of change” and have made an impact on equality through new legal strategies or innovative court cases.

The complaint was filed to the US Department of Transportation (DOT) by civil rights legal organisation Muslim Advocates and litigation specialist law firm Lewis Baach…Waleed Nassar, a partner in Lewis Baach, said: “This complaint is to ensure that a clear and unequivocal message is sent worldwide to any airline that chooses to contract with United States citizens and to offer flights to the United States: discrimination against any United States citizen on any basis – be it racial, religious, perceived ethnic origin or sexual orientation – is simply unacceptable and will not be tolerated.”

Waleed Nassar, an international disputes lawyer who represents two Saudi charities that are defendants in 9/11 litigation alongside Saudi Arabia, said, "the evidence, along with much of what has been submitted, is innuendo and circumstantial".

"The plaintiff's burden is to show something more direct, and that's really the only hope they have to have Saudi Arabia remain in the litigation," Nassar said. 

In September 2016, the US Congress passed the Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism Act (“JASTA”) into law, overriding President Obama’s veto to narrow the scope of foreign sovereign immunity for terrorism related claims and expanding liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (“ATA”) to now also include those who ‘aid, abet, or conspire’ with a foreign terrorist organisation. JASTA’s twin expansions of liability now make it easier to hook Middle Eastern countries and institutions into the web of costly US litigation. As President Obama himself recognised as a basis for his veto, ‘courts [can] potentially consider even minimal allegations…sufficient to open the door to litigation and wide-ranging discovery…’

A host of likely legal challenges will confront Middle East related entities doing business in or with the United States under President Trump, write Waleed Nassar and Kate Toomey.

"It's still their burden to prove their allegations, which right now is based on a lot of innuendo and leaps of logic," said Waleed Nassar, a partner at Lewis Baach, which represents two of the Saudi charities named in the case.

"The case had a low profile until he started his hunger strike, with the Egyptians reluctant to even admit he was being held," said Waleed Nassar, a senior associate with Lewis Baach PLLC, the law firm representing Soltan in the US. This led to "an uphill battle where you have to prove your client exists”, Nassar told Al Jazeera.

"Some [American] congressmen told us the Egyptian ambassador denied that Egypt was holding Soltan in prison on at least two occasions," said Nassar, who specialises in international dispute resolution.