美国最高法院支持埃克森向古巴寻求赔偿

US Supreme Court boosts Exxon’s bid to get compensation from Cuba

2026-06-23T14:11:36.529Z / Reuters

The logo of Exxon Mobil Corporation is shown on a monitor above the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York, December 30, 2015. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

• Summary
• Companies

• Exxon seeks compensation for property seized in 1960
• Trump allowed wave of US lawsuits against Cuba
• Exxon sued under US law called the Helms-Burton Act
• Trump administration supported Exxon in case

WASHINGTON, June 23 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court made it easier on Tuesday for U.S. companies to seek compensation from Cuba’s government ​for property seized decades ago by former leader Fidel Castro’s government, ruling in favor of ExxonMobil

(XOM.N), opens new tab
in its lawsuit against Cuban state-owned firm ​Corporación CIMEX.

In a 6-3 decision, the court said a legal defense called foreign sovereign immunity, which generally prohibits U.S. lawsuits against foreign governments and their agents, is not available in cases like the one Exxon brought against CIMEX under a 1996 U.S. law called the Helms-Burton Act.

The Reuters Power Up newsletter provides everything you need to know about the global energy industry. Sign up here.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who authored the ruling, wrote that the 30-year-old federal law “abrogates the sovereign immunity of Cuban agencies and instrumentalities.”

“The ​Helms-Burton Act authorizes private suits against Cuban agencies and instrumentalities — suits that would largely be nonstarters if subjected to the FSIA’s requirements,” Kavanaugh wrote, referring ​to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.

The court’s six conservative justices were in the majority, while its three liberal justices dissented ⁠from the ruling.

The Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s 2024 ruling that CIMEX could invoke the sovereign immunity defense.

The decision removes a major obstacle Exxon faced in its ​2019 lawsuit that accused CIMEX of unlawfully using a refinery and service stations that once belonged to Standard Oil, Exxon’s corporate predecessor. The case will return to a lower court ​for further deliberations on CIMEX’s potential liability.

A Helms-Burton Act provision called Title III permits lawsuits to be filed in U.S. courts against anyone who “traffics” in property confiscated by Cuba’s communist government after the 1959 revolution that brought Castro to power. U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration supported Exxon’s appeal to the Supreme Court.

US-CUBA TENSIONS

The ruling was issued at a rancorous time in U.S.-Cuban relations. The United States on ​May 20 brought murder charges against former Cuban President Raúl Castro, Fidel’s younger brother, in a major escalation in Trump’s pressure campaign against Cuba’s government.

Under Trump, the United States has ​effectively imposed a blockade on Cuba by threatening sanctions on countries supplying it with fuel, triggering power outages and exacerbating its worst crisis in decades.

Exxon’s suit involved Fidel Castro’s confiscation of all ​of the ⁠U.S. energy company’s Cuban oil and gas assets in 1959, which represented a loss valued at $70 million at the time. Exxon’s current claim is now valued at more than $1 billion because of interest and the potential for enhanced damages.

According to Exxon, its assets were transferred to CIMEX, Cuba’s largest state-owned conglomerate. CIMEX continues to hold and profit from the confiscated property.

Exxon’s lawsuit was part of a flood of about 40 cases filed under the Helms-Burton Act in 2019 and 2020 because of a change in U.S. policy toward ​Cuba during Trump’s first term in office.

When it ​passed the Helms-Burton Act, Congress authorized ⁠the U.S. president to suspend Title III on national security grounds. The provision was then suspended by three presidents seeking to avoid diplomatic conflicts with allies like Canada and Spain whose companies have invested in Cuba. Trump lifted that suspension in 2019.

Lower court rulings ​had made it difficult for U.S. companies to prevail in such cases, with most lawsuits being dismissed on jurisdictional or ​procedural grounds.

CRUISE DISPUTE

The decision ⁠was one of two issued by the Supreme Court this year in cases involving the Helms-Burton Act and Cuba.

In the other case, the court delivered a setback on May 21 to four American cruise operators that contested $440 million in combined judgments in litigation brought by a U.S. company called Havana Docks Corporation accusing them of unlawfully using docks in Cuba that it built ⁠and were ​later seized.

The justices set aside a lower court’s decision to throw out the judgments against Carnival

(CCL.N), opens new tab
, Norwegian Cruise ​Line Holdings

(NCLH.N), opens new tab
, Royal Caribbean Cruises

(RCL.N), opens new tab
and MSC Cruises that were awarded to Havana Docks. The Supreme Court’s decision sent the case back to the lower court for it to consider other defenses offered by the ​cruise lines.

Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Will Dunham