US Court Allows Lawsuit Against Russian Bank Over MH17 Downing

On February 4, 2025, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan decided that the family of an American killed when Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine in 2014 could proceed with a lawsuit against Russia's largest bank, Sberbank. This decision comes after years of legal wrangling and signifies a significant moment in the quest for accountability regarding one of the deadliest incidents in civil aviation history. Flight MH17 was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur when it was struck by a surface-to-air missile over territory controlled by pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, leading to the tragic loss of all 298 lives on board. Among the victims was Quinn Schansman, an 18-year-old American on his way to a family vacation. His family, in their pursuit of justice, accused Sberbank of facilitating financial transactions that supported the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), a separatist group accused of being responsible for downing the plane.

728*90

The lawsuit, initially filed in April 2019, targets Sberbank for allegedly using the U.S. banking system to funnel donor money to the DPR, thus providing material support to what Ukraine has described as a terrorist organization and which is under sanctions by the United States. Sberbank, a state-controlled entity, had argued for sovereign immunity, claiming that its actions were protected under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which generally shields foreign states and their agencies from being sued in U.S. courts. However, the appeals court rejected this argument in a 3-0 unanimous decision. Circuit Judge Joseph Bianco wrote that Sberbank's involvement in handling money transfers was "quintessentially commercial activity," thereby triggering an exception to FSIA protections. The judge's opinion was clear in stating that allowing Sberbank's position would undermine Congress's intent to provide a broad legal basis for civil litigants to sue entities supporting acts of terrorism against U.S. interests.

728*90

This ruling is not just a legal victory for the Schansman family but also sets a precedent for how international terrorism cases involving state-related entities might be handled in U.S. courts. It challenges the notion of sovereign immunity when commercial activities are in question, potentially influencing future litigation against similar entities. The decision was welcomed by the law firm Jenner & Block, representing the Schansman family. They expressed their intent to continue gathering evidence of Sberbank's alleged wrongdoing in the district court, hoping this step will lead to justice for Quinn Schansman and all others affected by the MH17 disaster. 

Cheap flights with cashback

Russia has consistently denied any involvement in the downing of MH17, and this lawsuit adds another layer to the international scrutiny and legal battles surrounding the incident. The case itself is part of a broader context where various legal actions have been taken across different jurisdictions, including the Netherlands where international trials have sought to hold individuals accountable for the downing of the flight. This ruling by the U.S. court not only opens a new chapter in the legal pursuit of accountability for the MH17 tragedy but also underscores the complexities of international law when it intersects with acts of war, terrorism, and the role of state entities in such conflicts. As the case progresses, it will be closely watched by legal scholars, international observers, and those seeking justice for the victims of MH17, highlighting the ongoing struggle between sovereignty, accountability, and the pursuit of justice in the international arena.

250*250

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post

1 / 3
980*120
2 / 3
728*90
3 / 3
EN - 728x90