Such cases involve extremely complex intellectual property, aviation engineering, and aircraft industry-specific business knowledge.
Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) April 22, 2013
Los Angeles Law Firm Bailey & Partners is pleased to announce that Celestial Airways has finally achieved victory with a final award of $12,450,648. The Tribunal of Arbitrators at the International Centre for Dispute Resolution in New York ruled in Celestial's favor in case number 50 181 T 0400 09. The Tribunal's award includes compensation for damages, attorneys' fees, interest and other costs, and was confirmed by the United States District Court Southern District of New York in the summer of 2012 ("Memorandum in Support of Petition to Confirm Arbitral Award and for Judgment Thereon"). International Law Firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and Barbara Carter of Santa Monica's Executive Presentations were all crucial in winning justice for Celestial. And due to his background in aviation completion litigation, Los Angeles Attorney Patrick Bailey was also instrumental in the victory.
According to documents filed with the International Centre for Dispute Resolution, Celestial Airways signed a contract with a Texas-based aircraft completion center in 2006. The aircraft was to receive a luxury interior and several upgrades that the completion center company, Associated Air Center, promised to complete by late 2007. The delivery date came and went and the aircraft was far from complete ("International Center for Dispute Resolution Final Award"). After other missed deadlines and unfulfilled promises, Celestial turned to their counselor Scott Williams at the Dallas office of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld when making a formal legal complaint became necessary. The two sides entered arbitration in 2009 ("International Center for Dispute Resolution Final Award"). Through the arbitration process, Celestial also wanted a law firm on its side with a background in the specialized area of aircraft completion litigation. This is why they called on Patrick Bailey.
Bailey & Partners is one of many law firms that has a refined focus on aviation law. Like some other law firms, they are extremely experienced in aviation wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases related to commercial and independently owned aircraft. Unlike many such law firms, however, Bailey & Partners is also a leading firm for aircraft completion litigation. Such cases involve extremely complex intellectual property, aviation engineering, and aircraft industry-specific business knowledge. Such cases also rely on access to aviation engineers, aircraft fuel analysts, aircraft completion experts and other highly-specialized resources. These resources must also include the ability to convey evidence in a compelling and persuasive way. Celestial's legal team had all of these essential resources.
The legal team focused on many factors including the following: delay in completion, weight of the aircraft and a failure to attain the highest industry standards. Bailey, Williams, and Carter demonstrated that AAC failed in all three respects.
The December 2007 date was the first delivery date that AAC missed ("Memorandum in Support of Petition to Confirm Arbitral Award and for Judgment Thereon"). They rescheduled the delivery of the completed aircraft multiple times. Finally, in February of 2009, Celestial had their plane flown to another company for painting but not before more serious problems were uncovered and "these issues were far more serious than missed deadlines," Bailey asserts.
The weight of an aircraft is absolutely crucial for safety and fuel efficiency. As the plane was prepared for flight to the painting company, AAC reported that the plane was overweight and admitted that further revisions might be necessary when painting was completed. Thus, the plane had only been partially completed but was already overweight. The plane would get even heavier after painting and all work was completed on the interior. But this was not an end to the problems, according to the documents submitted to the Arbitration Tribunal.
The aircraft was not only too heavy but the interior also did not adhere to safety requirements set forth by the FAA. The furniture and fixtures inside the plane had not been properly tested for fire-resistance before they were installed. Instead of testing before installation, AAC sprayed a chemical called CH10 to make the interior fire-retardant. This is far below acceptable “Highest Industry Standards.” Fixtures and finishes should be burn-tested and treated before installation. Additionally, the legal team contended that the center had tried to meet their deadlines in haste and had not taken the time necessary to engineer parts that would not adversely impact the weight of the plane ("Memorandum in Support of Petition to Confirm Arbitral Award and for Judgment Thereon").
In addition to these failings, Bailey and the rest of the legal team persuasively argued that AAC had not adhered to the highest industry standards; much of the work they had done on the plane's interior was ill-fitting, heavily-scuffed, and otherwise unworthy of the millions of dollars in costs that Celestial had paid, the legal team argued. While the plane was being painted, Celestial decided not to return the plane to AAC even though it was not completed ("Memorandum in Support of Petition to Confirm Arbitral Award and for Judgment Thereon").
The legal team made up of Bailey, Williams, and Carter was able to pour through millions of intricate documents, emails, interviews, physical evidence, and other details to show that AAC had not met the highest industry standards. Furthermore, particularly with the expertise of Barbara Carter of Santa Monica's Executive Presentations, they were able to present this evidence in a highly-successful way that assured the decision they were seeking. While evidence was uncovered by expert investigators and lead attorneys Bailey and Williams, the presentation of evidence was expertly coordinated by Carter. The International Arbitration Tribunal was persuaded when they made their judgment. Celestial may have wished they selected a different aircraft completion center initially; however, they cannot regret their choice of Bailey, Williams and Carter.