Arab-American Billionaire Accuses the Canadian Government of Discrimination

[Sgt_Strider]

[url]http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/30/wdr-ambassador-bridge-nafta100430.html[/url]

[url]http://www.freep.com/article/20100501/OPINION01/5010322/Borderline-silliness-over-new-bridge[/url]

I'm not sure how many people are aware that the Ambassador Bridge linking Windsor to Detroit is owned by Arab-American Matty Moroun. He is not only accusing the Canadian government of discrimination, but also Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm of betraying US interests for Canada's because she was born in Canada.

It's fairly obvious that Moroun's claims are ludicrous. Governor Granholm's predecessors also supported having a publicly owned bridge linking Canada to the US. He just wants to preserve his monopoly on the bridge linking Windsor to Detroit. If this new bridge were to be built, it'll not only reduce the value of his bridge, but also cut into his profit. Also, I don't see any discrimination by the Canadian government whatsoever. No one is telling him to shut down his bridge. He has the right to compete with the new bridge.

[kitbor]

Greed has not bound. You were born with nothing, and take nothing with you when you pass away. How many more year. he will live? I pity him.

[Sgt_Strider]

[QUOTE=kitbor;10752592]Greed has not bound. You were born with nothing, and take nothing with you when you pass away. How many more year. he will live? I pity him.[/QUOTE]

It doesn't matter how many more years he has left on this planet. His children may inherit his shares of the company.

[45ED]

I just think the dude's hilarious to the nines:
[INDENT][INDENT][SIZE="4"]Moroun suit claims NAFTA breach[/SIZE]

[SIZE="1"]Bridge owner unlikely to win $3.5B, experts say

By Dave Battagello, The Windsor Star April 5, 2010[/SIZE]


WINDSOR, Ont. — Regulations under NAFTA allow for massive arbitration claims such as the one made by Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Moroun, who is seeking US$3.5 billion from the Canadian government, says a University of Western Ontario law professor specializing in international trade.

But final settlements are often a fraction of what is originally sought, said Chi Carmody, who also serves as Canadian director of the Canada-U.S. Law Institute.

"In a lot of these cases, the first appearance is a bark worse than the bite," he said.

"They are launching everything and the kitchen sink. But the end result is most often small amounts of money or it's dismissed.

"This is the opening salvo. It's showcase litigation meant to get a lot of attention. But over the long term most of the claims end up nowhere near that amount -- and several are dismissed."

Moroun says the Canadian government violated the North American Free Trade Agreement with its proposal known as DRIC -- a plan to construct a $1.6-billion Windsor-Essex border parkway that links Highway 401 to a new downriver bridge.

[B]His legal documents indicate Canada stands to be the greatest beneficiary under the plan since DRIC features investment by the Canadian government and likely other private Canadian business interests.

That arrangement discriminates against American investors -- largely Moroun and his bridge company, the claim says.[/B]

[B]"Canada has arbitrarily undermined the claimant's investments by steering away traffic."[/B]

[B]The actions of the Canadian government have breached obligations under NAFTA which must treat the bridge company no less favourably than Canadian or third-country investors, the claim says.[/B]

In the growing global economy, arbitration such as NAFTA's Chapter 11 has become a preferred resource for resolving binational disputes, said Rene Cadieux, an investor state arbitration lawyer in Montreal who handles high-profile arbitration cases involving global treaties.

Such treaties number about 2,000 around the world, dating back to the days after the Second World War.

Fair and equitable treatment as Moroun has claimed is the most common thread among the treaties, including NAFTA's Chapter 11.

"It's a concept so broad, any good lawyer can say it's unfair," Cadieux said.

Another major linchpin is "national treatment," he said.

"You cannot give a better treatment to Canadian citizens. You have to extend the same to (Americans) and Mexicans," he said.

The Chapter 11 process calls for Canada to respond within 90 days. After that, a hearing is scheduled in front of a three-member tribunal. Each side selects one member, then the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes in New York appoints the third member.

A potential exists for one party to endlessly delay the process by being slow to file documents or respond to requests for others, Cadieux said.

Moroun could also push for a freeze on government actions that impact his business -- such as building the DRIC bridge. "Its equivalent to an injunction and the tribunal can say to the state 'freeze,'" Cadieux said. "These are very hard to get, but from time to time it does happen.

"What generally happens is to award compensation in damages. Let (governments) build the bridge and we will compensate you later."

The crux of the arbitration case will likely be for the tribunal to decide if the government actions have discriminated against Moroun, Carmody said.

"Tribunals in the past have said governments have the right to legislate," he said. "The question is of the intent behind what it is doing -- whether it's regulatory valid in all facts."

[B]One view that might be argued by the government is on Moroun's endless promise to build a new crossing, Carmody said.

"He waited and waffled so the governments were forced to build a competitor," he said. "Now (Moroun) is launching a claim to get money out it. That could be another view on what might be happening."[/B]
© Copyright (c) The Windsor Star

[url]http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/30/wdr-ambassador-bridge-nafta100430.html[/url][/INDENT][/INDENT]

He had an opportunity to build that second bridge but sat on his arse. Now he complains, really, because someone is taking away a (potential) cash cow. Hey, folks aren't going to wait [I]forever[/I]. What a tactic (on his part) to exert/affirm that he has control. Bleh.

I also think the portion of the claim that regards favourtism to be equally, if not moreso, hilarious. If they eschewed other offers and opportunities to allow Moroun more time to build the bridge, isn't that comparable to favouring him over others? So why is it okay in that instance to favour him and his business but, apparently, it's not okay to extend the opportunity to someone else who is willing to do the job in a timely manner unlike him? Hypocrite.

The government, in this instance, [B]is[/B] treating him just like anyone else - you don't do your job or uphold your promises, they'll go elsewhere to get the done done. They are doing exactly what he wants - treating him fairly - and yet he complains? I don't get it.

[047.Ronin]

So it boils down to a business man not wanting competition? What's more alarming is that the bridge is privately owned. I"m sure there's laws in place to prevent him from disrupting day to day operations but the thought that a public structure as important as this could allow for private proprietorship.

Oh whatever! Just another billionaire looking to expand his empire :rolleyes:

[Sgt_Strider]

[QUOTE=047.Ronin;10752679][B]So it boils down to a business man not wanting competition?[/B] What's more alarming is that the bridge is privately owned. I"m sure there's laws in place to prevent him from disrupting day to day operations but the thought that a public structure as important as this could allow for private proprietorship.

Oh whatever! Just another billionaire looking to expand his empire :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Yes, but of course he wouldn't want to characterize his lawsuit like that because it won't win in the court of public opinion. However, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's all about money. Moroun is just doing whatever he can to derail this project so that he will continue to rake in the money.

[Piro21]

Why the hell is a vital link between two nations allowed to be privately owned anyways? Build the competing bridge and let him keep up. It's the capitalist thing to do.

[najibs]

Moroun is a moron alright :twisted:

[Dina_E]

[QUOTE=047.Ronin;10752679]So it boils down to a business man not wanting competition? What's more alarming is that the bridge is privately owned. I"m sure there's laws in place to prevent him from disrupting day to day operations but the thought that a public structure as important as this could allow for private proprietorship.

Oh whatever! Just another billionaire looking to expand his empire :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

i sure hope he has no control over the security clearance over who gets to pass through as well considering his background.

[spookie149]

[QUOTE=Piro21;10753153]Why the hell is a vital link between two nations allowed to be privately owned anyways? Build the competing bridge and let him keep up. It's the capitalist thing to do.[/QUOTE]

I'm just as confused by this as well.

[stealth]

[QUOTE=Piro21;10753153]Why the hell is a vital link between two nations allowed to be privately owned anyways? Build the competing bridge and let him keep up. It's the capitalist thing to do.[/QUOTE]

In these times, it may be the safest thing to do ;)

[dragon_drift]

Another a-hole using the race card...

the sooner we build this bridge, the better...

[Imran DeRoy]

What a sleazeball. Sat on his hands for years and [I]now[/I] he's b1tching.

I hope he falls off his bridge, and there is a multicultural party on it to celebrate.

[QUOTE=Sgt_Strider;10752567][url]http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/30/wdr-ambassador-bridge-nafta100430.html[/url]

[url]http://www.freep.com/article/20100501/OPINION01/5010322/Borderline-silliness-over-new-bridge[/url]

I'm not sure how many people are aware that the Ambassador Bridge linking Windsor to Detroit is owned by [B]Arab-American[/B] Matty Moroun.[/QUOTE]

Your thread and its title are worthless. The lowlife is claiming [B]discrimination against American investors[/B], [B]not discrimination because he is Arab.[/B]

Hell, guy whitewashes his name to make it more palatable to white folk because he doesn't even want to be identified as an Arab.

Still, people like you think news about a sleazeball like this takes on a whole other dimension because of his race, and rush to RFD breathlessly declaring that not only is he a sleaze, he's an AHH-RAB.

What purpose did specifying he is Arab-American serve? None, nor was it relevant.

[JohnEnglish]

[QUOTE=Imran DeRoy;10754499]What a sleazeball. Sat on his hands for years and [I]now[/I] he's b1tching.

I hope he falls off his bridge, and there is a multicultural party on it to celebrate.



Your thread and its title are worthless. The lowlife is claiming [B]discrimination against American investors[/B], [B]not discrimination because he is Arab.[/B]

Hell, guy whitewashes his name to make it more palatable to white folk because he doesn't even want to be identified as an Arab.

Still, people like you think news about a sleazeball like this takes on a whole other dimension because of his race, and rush to RFD breathlessly declaring that not only is he a sleaze, he's an AHH-RAB.

What purpose did specifying he is Arab-American serve? None, nor was it relevant.[/QUOTE]The guy's own lawyer specifically says that he's an Arab-American.

[quote]It is clear that the Canadian government is using its legislative power inappropriately to discriminate against an Arab-American businessman who has owned and operated the Ambassador Bridge for more than 30 years.[/quote]

[Imran DeRoy]

[QUOTE=JohnEnglish;10754806]The guy's own lawyer specifically says that he's an Arab-American.[/QUOTE]

Well then, fair enough.

He deserves the flak he gets for playing that card. Prick.