United States: Calm Before The Storm? What We Can Learn From The Slow Start To Helms-Burton Cases

Last Updated: July 18 2019
Article by John B. Bellinger, III, John P. Barker, Tal R. Machnes, Tom McSorley and Elizabeth T.M. Fitzpatrick
Most Popular Article in United States, August 2019

In May, President Trump became the first president in 23 years not to suspend the application of Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, which allows US nationals to sue persons and entities who "traffic" in property confiscated by the Cuban government in 1959 and the early 1960s.1 In the ten weeks since Title III took effect, claimants have already filed at least nine lawsuits against more than a dozen Cuban and European companies, as well as against one American company. Although the number of lawsuits filed so far is fewer than many experts expected, the potential for a large volume of lawsuits still remains high.

The US Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (FCSC) previously certified nearly 6,000 US claims to property expropriated by the Cuban government, each of which could potentially become the basis for a Title III lawsuit or part of a larger class action. In addition, there could be as many as 200,000 more uncertified claims.2

Despite the large number of potential claims, the smaller-than-expected number of suits may reflect a reluctance by US companies to sue Cuban government entities, or European or other companies with whom they have or hope to have business relationships, as well as ambiguities in the law that may complicate litigation. Companies doing business in Cuba should closely monitor how the first wave of Title III lawsuits fares in the courts. These cases will clarify the scope of Title III and will likely influence how other potential claimants choose to proceed.

Suits for Confiscation of Ports, Hotels, Refineries, and a Bank

On May 2, the first day Title III became effective, three suits were filed. The energy conglomerate Exxon Mobil sued two Cuban state-owned companies, Corporación Cimex S.A. and Unión Cuba-Petróleo, for trafficking in oil refineries, service stations, and other facilities that the Cuban government seized from Exxon Mobil's predecessor Standard Oil in 1960.3 The FCSC previously certified Standard Oil's claim, which is now held by Exxon Mobil, for more than $71.6 million in losses resulting from confiscation.4 Exxon is seeking damages that include the value of the certified claim, interest, treble damages, and other costs—totaling nearly $280 million.5

The two other suits filed on the first day were against US cruise operator Carnival for docking its cruise lines on confiscated waterfront property.6 In the first lawsuit, Havana Docks Corporation sued Carnival based on a certified claim to the Havana Cruise Port Terminal which it owned and operated from 1917 until the Cuban Government confiscated it in 1960.7 In the second lawsuit, an individual, Javier Garcia-Bengochea, sued Carnival for trafficking on a port located in Santiago de Cuba seized from his family and in which Garcia-Bengochea claims 82.5% interest.8 These suits—against a defendant whose ships have simply been docking at the confiscated ports—demonstrate how broadly "trafficking" can be construed by plaintiffs under Title III.9 The suits are also somewhat surprising in that they have been filed against a US company, rather than against Cuban or non-US companies. Carnival has filed a motion to dismiss the claims on the grounds that its engagement in the Cuban ports is not "trafficking" under a travel-related exclusion to the definition in Helms-Burton and, separately, that it resulted from travel to Cuba that had been specifically licensed by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control.10

The fourth suit, which is a class action, was filed on May 20 by a Cuban American family that claims ownership of the Hotel San Carlos in Cienfuegos.11 The family is suing numerous Cuban companies and officials for trafficking in their confiscated property and is seeking class certification for the lawsuit on the grounds that the defendants operate at least 34 other hotels, resorts, and tourist attractions that are all confiscated properties of Cuban American heirs.12 The Hotel San Carlos has been renovated and renamed and is currently managed by the Spanish hotel company Meliá Hotels International SA. Plaintiffs state that they will add Melia, one of the most significant foreign investors in Cuba,13 if Melia does not compensate them for use of their property.14

The same plaintiffs have filed four other lawsuits—all class actions—against other Cuban companies, as well as the online booking platform Trivago GmbH,15 which is a German subsidiary of the US travel website Expedia, and the Dutch booking platform Booking.com BV.16 The plaintiffs argue that Trivago and Booking.com benefited from their confiscated property through their booking services, commissions, and fees.17 These suits are predicated on an expansive theory that anyone providing services to the allegedly confiscated hotels is "trafficking" in the confiscated hotels, based on the broad definition of "trafficking" in Title III.

Most recently, on July 10, the heirs to Banco Nuñez, a Cuban bank nationalized and absorbed into Banco Nacional de Cuba (BNC) by the Cuban Government in 1960, filed a lawsuit against the French bank Societe Generale S.A. The estimated damages in the lawsuit, which include the alleged value of the heirs' interest when the bank was nationalized, plus treble damages, interest, and plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, are approximately $792 million.18 The plaintiffs claim 10.5% equity of BNC, the percentage of the Cuban banking industry that Banco Nuñez controlled at the time the industry was nationalized, but they do not hold a certified claim related to this interest. Without a certified claim, the plaintiffs have additional hurdles to overcome, including a requirement in Title III to demonstrate that they could not have brought a claim before the FCSC to certify their interest in BNC. If the plaintiffs can overcome these procedural hurdles, they then must demonstrate that Societe Generale is liable for "trafficking" in expropriated property. According to the complaint, the plaintiffs' are arguing that Societe Generale has been "trafficking" because it has generated millions of dollars in profit from processing transactions for and collecting fees from BNC.19 Societe Generale is the second defendant (in addition to Expedia) that is the target of a Title III suit after having been recently penalized by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) for alleged Cuba-related sanctions violations that are being used as a factual basis for the Title III claim.20

Why the Slow Start?

Many experts had expected the activation of Title III to result in hundreds, if not thousands, of lawsuits.21 Title III creates a presumption of damages in the amount of claims certified by the FCSC and, more attractive still, allows recovery of treble damages in addition to the amount of the claim, plus interest, plus attorneys' fees. Moreover, the FCSC maintains a publicly available list of the 5,913 US claimants whose claims have been certified, providing a roadmap of potential plaintiffs. Despite the blueprint for claimants and plaintiffs' counsel, the slow start to Title III litigation may indicate that the US companies with the largest claims are reluctant to sue Cuban government entities or European, Canadian, Asian, and Latin American companies with whom they do business or (in the case of Cuban companies) hope to do business in the future. Plaintiffs' lawyers may be hesitant to represent individuals with smaller claims, given that litigation under Title III is likely to be protracted and costly, and there may be difficulties ultimately collecting damages from the Cuban government or Cuban entities even where litigation is successful. Many of the several thousand certified claims are for less than $5,000 in losses, which, even with interest, may not result in particularly large winnings especially when considered against the burdens of litigation (and the roughly $6,000 special filing fee for Title III suits). The success (or lack thereof) of the initial class action suits will be telling as to whether the hurdles of small claims may be overcome through future class action litigation.

Many Ambiguities Remain to be Resolved

The nine lawsuits already filed highlight some of the many ambiguities in Title III. For example, the law seems to permit the same plaintiff to recover for the same "trafficking" from multiple defendants who may "profit" from a particular confiscated property. How the hotel plaintiffs fare in their cases against various defendants may help clarify the equitable limits of recovery for a single claimant under Title III. Similarly, a single defendant who benefits in a very limited way from alleged "trafficking" (such as Trivago or Carnival, who have likely benefitted from alleged "trafficking" at values far less than the alleged value of the underlying claims) would seem to potentially be liable for the entire value of a given claim, if the defendant is found liable for "trafficking" at all.

In addition, the law is unclear regarding the rate of interest allowable to claimants. Title III provides that for certified claims, trafficking individuals or companies will be liable to the US claimants for the greater of monetary damages equaling the amount certified by the FCSC or the fair market value of the property, plus interest.22 Title III states that the interest should be based on the standard civil judgments statute, which sets the rate at current levels.23 However, the FCSC claims, which were certified roughly half a century ago (and well before the passage of the Helms-Burton Act in 1996), originally set forth a 6% per annum interest rate. Since interest rates are at historic lows, the rates that are potentially applicable to Title III lawsuits vary so widely that for some claims the difference could be hundreds of millions of dollars. Exxon has asserted that the 6% rate, as opposed to the Title III rate, should apply in the valuation of its claim.24

Finally, while there are no exceptions under Title III for US persons or US companies that traffic on confiscated property, there are some statutory exceptions to Title III's definition of "trafficking." These exceptions include the delivery of international telecommunication signals to Cuba and transactions and uses of property that are both necessary and incidental to lawful travel to Cuba.25 How these exceptions are interpreted by courts, as well as whether companies can be subject to Title III liability if they are engaged in other "lawful" Cuba-related activity, such as other activity licensed by OFAC, remains to be seen.

Conclusion – "Fear of Missing Out"

Although the number of Title III lawsuits filed so far has been smaller than expected, given the large potential damages and interest available to successful claimants, more lawsuits can be expected, especially if the early cases are resolved in ways favorable to plaintiffs. Some plaintiffs and plaintiffs' lawyers may also be moved by FOMO ("fear of missing out") from a concern that a different US administration might re-suspend Title III, which would prevent new lawsuits from being filed but would not affect existing suits.

*John Bellinger served as the Legal Adviser for the Department of State from 2005-2009 and as the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council at the White House from 2001-2005. John Barker served as both the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Nonproliferation Controls and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Export Controls.

**Dianne Lake, a student at Yale Law School, contributed in the preparation of this Advisory.

  1. See Arnold & Porter Advisory (Apr. 22, 2019), Turnabout: Preparing for the Trump Administration's New Cuba Restrictions and Lawsuits on "Trafficking" in Confiscated Property.
  2. See id.
  3. See Complaint, Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporacion Cimex S.A. and Union Cuba-Petroleo, No. 19-CV-1277 (D.D.C. May 2, 2019).
  4. Id. at 8.
  5. Mengqi Sun, Exxon Mobil Sues Cuban Companies Over Seized Property, The Wall Street Journal (May 3, 2019).
  6. Marc Frank and Nelson Acosta, Carnival First Company Sued for Profiting from Expropriated Cuban Property, Reuters (May 2, 2019).
  7. Complaint, Havana Docks Corp. v. Carnival Corp., No. 1:19-cv-21724 (S.D. Fla. May 2, 2019).
  8. Complaint, Garcia-Bengochea v. Carnival Corp., No. 1:19-cv-21725 (S.D. Fla. May 2, 2019). A portion of Garcia-Bengochea's claim was certified in 1970. Id.
  9. Under Title III, "a person 'traffics' in confiscated property if that person knowingly and intentionally (i) sells, transfers, distributes, dispenses, brokers, manages, or otherwise disposes of confiscated property, or purchases, leases, receives, possesses, obtains control of, manages, uses, or otherwise acquires or holds an interest in confiscated property, (ii) engages in a commercial activity using or otherwise benefiting from confiscated property, or (iii) causes, directs, participates in, or profits from, trafficking (as described in clause (i) or (ii)) by another person, or otherwise engages in trafficking (as described in clause (i) or (ii)) through another person, without the authorization of any United States national who holds a claim to the property." 22 U.S.C. § 6023(13)(A).
  10. See Motion to Dismiss, Havana Docks Corp. v. Carnival Corp., No. 1:19-cv-21724 (S.D. Fla. May 30, 2019).
  11. Complaint, Mata et al. v. Grupo Hotelero Gran Caribe et al., No. 1:19-cv-22025 (S.D. Fla. May 20, 2019).
  12. See id.
  13. Jonathan Levin and Stephen Wicary, Exiles Target Cruise, Hotel Companies to Recoup Their Piece of Cuba, Bloomberg (June 13, 2019).
  14. See Complaint, Mata et al. v. Grupo Hotelero Gran Caribe et al., No. 1:19-cv-22025 (S.D. Fla. May 20, 2019). In addition, a suit alleging Cuban trafficking claims was filed against Meliá in Spanish courts in June. Mario J. Penton, Meliá faces $10 million lawsuit for hotels on confiscated properties in Cuba, Miami Herald Mail Media (June 15, 2019).
  15. Jonathan Levin, Exiles Sue Expedia's Trivago for 'Trafficking' in Cuban Property, Bloomberg (June 19, 2019).
  16. Complaint, Echevarria et al. v. TRIVAGO GMBH et al., No. 1:19-cv-22621 (S.D. Fla. Jun 24, 2019); Complaint, Trinidad v. TRIVAGO GMBH et al., No. 1:19-cv-22629 (S.D. Fla. Jun 24, 2019); Complaint, Del Valle et al. v. TRIVAGO GMBH et al., No. 1:19-cv-22619 (S.D. Fla. Jun 24, 2019); Complaint, Mata et al. v. TRIVAGO GMBH, No. 1:19-cv-22529 (S.D. Fla. Jun 18, 2019).
  17. Complaint, Mata et al. v. TRIVAGO GMBH, No. 1:19-cv-22529 (S.D. Fla. Jun 18, 2019).
  18. Jonathan Stempel, Societe Generale Sued for $792 Million by Heirs of Cuban Bank Seized by Castro, REUTERS (July 10, 2019).
  19. Complaint at 17, Sucesores de Don Carlos Nunez y Dona Pura Galvez, Inc. v. Societe Generale, S.A., No. 1:19-cv-22842 (S.D. Fla. Jul 10, 2019).
  20. See OFAC Settlement with Expedia (June 13, 2019); and OFAC Settlement with Societe Generale (Nov. 19, 2018).
  21. Carmen Sesin, Claims Under Cuban Seized-Property Law Are Fewer Than Expected, NBC News (June 3, 2019).
  22. 22 U.S.C. § 6082.
  23. 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
  24. Complaint at 16, Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporacion Cimex S.A. and Union Cuba-Petroleo, No. 19-CV-1277 (D.D.C. May 2, 2019).
  25. 22 U.S.C. § 6023(13)(B).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions