Search by: Name Office Select Abu Dhabi California Brussels Cologne Hong Kong London Milan New York Paris Rome São Paulo Seoul Washington, D.C. Position Select Associate Avvocato Counsel International Lawyer Partner Partner Emerita Partner Emeritus Senior Attorney Senior Counsel Experience Select Africa Airlines, Aviation and Aerospace Anti-Corruption Antitrust Antitrust Litigation Appellate Litigation Artificial Intelligence Asia Automotive Banking and Financial Institutions Bankruptcy Litigation Brussels Canada Capital Markets Capital Solutions and Private Credit China Climate Change Litigation and Enforcement Compliance and Integrity Congressional Investigations Consumer Products and Retail Consumer Protection Litigation and Enforcement Corporate Advisory Corporate Governance Cybersecurity and Privacy Debt Finance Derivatives Economic Sanctions and Foreign Investments e-Discovery Emerging Markets Energy Environmental Law ESG – Our Environmental, Social and Governance Practice Europe Executive Compensation, Employee Benefits, and ERISA False Claims Act Enforcement and Investigations Family Offices Financial Technology Foreign Investment Review France Germany Global Crisis Management Global Funds High-Yield India Infrastructure Insurance Intellectual Property Intellectual Property Litigation International Arbitration International Trade and Investment Israel Italy Korea Latin America Litigation and Arbitration Manufacturing and Industrial Services Media and Advertising Merger Clearance Mergers and Acquisitions Metals and Mining Middle East and North Africa National Security Nordic Region Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Private Clients Private Equity Privatizations Pro Bono Public International Law Pulp and Paper Real Estate Restructuring Securities and M&A Litigation Shareholder Engagement and Activism Defense Sovereign Governments and International Institutions Special Purpose Acquisition Companies Sponsor Solutions Sports State Aid Structured Finance Tax Technology Telecommunications United Kingdom United States White-Collar Defense and Investigations Law School Keyword Search Our Practice close Select a Category Select a Category Corporate Dispute Resolution Industries Regions Regulatory All Capabilities Select a Category Corporate Dispute Resolution Industries Regions Regulatory All Capabilities Select an Area of Expertise Select an Area of Expertise Africa Airlines, Aviation and Aerospace Anti-Corruption Antitrust Antitrust Litigation Appellate Litigation Artificial Intelligence Asia Automotive Banking and Financial Institutions Bankruptcy Litigation Brussels Canada Capital Markets Capital Solutions and Private Credit China Climate Change Litigation and Enforcement Compliance and Integrity Congressional Investigations Consumer Products and Retail Consumer Protection Litigation and Enforcement Corporate Advisory Corporate Governance Cybersecurity and Privacy Debt Finance Derivatives Economic Sanctions and Foreign Investments e-Discovery Emerging Markets Energy Environmental Law Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Europe Executive Compensation, Employee Benefits, and ERISA False Claims Act Enforcement and Investigations Family Offices Financial Technology Foreign Investment Review France Germany Global Crisis Management Global Funds High-Yield India Infrastructure Insurance Intellectual Property Intellectual Property Litigation International Arbitration International Trade and Investment Israel Italy Korea Latin America Litigation and Arbitration Manufacturing and Industrial Services Media and Advertising Merger Clearance Mergers and Acquisitions Metals and Mining Middle East and North Africa National Security Nordic Region Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Private Clients Private Equity Privatizations Pro Bono Public International Law Pulp and Paper Real Estate Restructuring Securities and M&A Litigation Shareholder Engagement and Activism Defense Sovereign Governments and International Institutions Special Purpose Acquisition Companies Sponsor Solutions Sports State Aid Structured Finance Tax Technology Telecommunications United Kingdom United States White-Collar Defense and Investigations Select an Area of Expertise Africa Airlines, Aviation and Aerospace Anti-Corruption Antitrust Antitrust Litigation Appellate Litigation Artificial Intelligence Asia Automotive Banking and Financial Institutions Bankruptcy Litigation Brussels Canada Capital Markets Capital Solutions and Private Credit China Climate Change Litigation and Enforcement Compliance and Integrity Congressional Investigations Consumer Products and Retail Consumer Protection Litigation and Enforcement Corporate Advisory Corporate Governance Cybersecurity and Privacy Debt Finance Derivatives Economic Sanctions and Foreign Investments e-Discovery Emerging Markets Energy Environmental Law Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Europe Executive Compensation, Employee Benefits, and ERISA False Claims Act Enforcement and Investigations Family Offices Financial Technology Foreign Investment Review France Germany Global Crisis Management Global Funds High-Yield India Infrastructure Insurance Intellectual Property Intellectual Property Litigation International Arbitration International Trade and Investment Israel Italy Korea Latin America Litigation and Arbitration Manufacturing and Industrial Services Media and Advertising Merger Clearance Mergers and Acquisitions Metals and Mining Middle East and North Africa National Security Nordic Region Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology Private Clients Private Equity Privatizations Pro Bono Public International Law Pulp and Paper Real Estate Restructuring Securities and M&A Litigation Shareholder Engagement and Activism Defense Sovereign Governments and International Institutions Special Purpose Acquisition Companies Sponsor Solutions Sports State Aid Structured Finance Tax Technology Telecommunications United Kingdom United States White-Collar Defense and Investigations Innovation Innovation close Select a Page Innovation at Cleary e-Discovery Technology Practice Innovation ClearyX Select a Page Innovation at Cleary e-Discovery Technology Practice Innovation ClearyX Careers close Select a Role Select a Role Legal Paralegal Administrative U.S. Summer Associates Select a Role Legal Paralegal Administrative U.S. Summer Associates Select a Location Select a Location New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels London Cologne Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Abu Dhabi Seoul Select a Page New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels London Cologne Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Abu Dhabi Seoul Select a Location Select a Location New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels Seoul Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Select a Page New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels Seoul Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Select a Location Select a Location New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels London Cologne Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Abu Dhabi Seoul Select a Page New York Washington, D.C. California Paris Brussels London Cologne Rome Milan Hong Kong São Paulo Abu Dhabi Seoul News & Insights close Select a Page Browse By:
On November 1, 2023, the federal district court for the Southern District of New York granted Sri Lanka’s request for a six-month stay of proceedings in a lawsuit related to Sri Lanka’s 2022 sovereign debt default.[1]
Plaintiff Hamilton Reserve Bank filed the lawsuit in June 2022, before IMF staff-level review and preliminary negotiations with creditors had taken place.
The district court’s recent stay decision comes after the United States, France, and the United Kingdom filed statements in the case in support of Sri Lanka’s request for a stay in light of its ongoing debt restructuring process. In accordance with the stay, the district court denied Hamilton Reserve Bank’s pending motion for summary judgment without prejudice, meaning the motion can be renewed after the stay is lifted.
In its ruling, the district court considered dual U.S. policy interests in encouraging IMF foreign debt resolution procedures and ensuring the enforceability of debt contracts. In the past, some courts balancing these interests have allowed judgment entry but stayed judgment enforcement. Here, consistent with the statement submitted by the United States, the district court found these interests were best served through a stay of judgment entry proceedings.
In June 2022, plaintiff Hamilton Reserve Bank Ltd. filed a lawsuit against Sri Lanka related to its default on its 5.875% bonds due July 25, 2022. It brought claims for (i) non-payment of approximately $258 million in principal and interest on the bonds; (ii) a declaratory judgment; and (iii) an injunction related to the bonds’ pari passu (“equal treatment”) clause.
As summarized in our prior Alert Memorandum , the lawsuit was filed before the IMF had completed its staff-level review and before even preliminary negotiations among Sri Lanka and its creditors had taken place, which is unusual timing for such a case. The lawsuit also raised various threshold questions, including that Hamilton Reserve Bank had not alleged it was authorized to act on behalf of the registered “Holder” of the bonds and that its pari passu claim was based on recycled arguments that have been rejected by New York courts.
Hamilton Reserve Bank filed an amended complaint in October 2022, dropping its declaratory judgment and pari passu claims and alleging that it had received authorization from the registered “Holder.” Sri Lanka moved to dismiss, arguing that the authorization was insufficient based on the contractual terms. The district court denied Sri Lanka’s motion in a March 2023 ruling.
After the parties engaged in discovery regarding ownership of the bonds, Hamilton Reserve Bank filed a motion for summary judgment (seeking a money judgment on its bond claims). In July 2023, Sri Lanka moved for a six-month stay, as it “hopes to implement restructuring agreements” by the end of 2023.[2]
In the briefing, Hamilton Reserve Bank noted that neither the U.S. government nor any other creditor of Sri Lanka had joined Sri Lanka’s stay request. Following this, France and the United Kingdom (as members of the Paris Club) and the United States all filed submissions arguing that a stay would best facilitate an orderly process for restructuring Sri Lanka’s debt with official sector and private creditors.
On November 1, 2023, the district court granted a stay until February 29, 2024, holding that “a judgment for Hamilton would likely threaten the complex debt negotiations and, hence, the successful economic rehabilitation of Sri Lanka” because it would “provide an incentiv[e] to other bondholders to engage in line-jumping litigation and deter commercial creditors from participating in the restructuring negotiations.”[3] This could “threaten Sri Lanka’s progress towards the[] IMF targets, its economic recovery, and the well-being of its citizenry.”[4]
The district court noted that the stay was of a limited duration. Prejudice to Hamilton Reserve Bank was mitigated by the pre-judgment interest applicable to a future judgment. And judicial economy also supported a stay, to prevent a “rush-to-the-courthouse” by other private creditors seeking “to secure priority.”[5]
The district court disagreed with Hamilton Reserve Bank that a stay would be a “radical departure” from “four decades of U.S. policy.”[6] Like other courts that have considered similar stay requests, the district court cited the dual U.S. policy interests in (i) encouraging “IMF foreign debt resolution procedures” and (ii) ensuring “enforceability of valid debts under the principles of contract law.”[7]
The district court found that these interests are best balanced by affording sovereigns “a limited opportunity to achieve a consensual resolution before judgments are entered or enforced against their debts.”[8] By contrast, some courts applying this framework have granted limited stays of judgment enforcement without staying judgment entry. Accordingly, this ruling potentially provides helpful precedent for sovereigns in future debt litigation cases.
[1] Hamilton Rsrv. Bank Ltd. v. Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka , 22CV5199 (DLC), 2023 WL 7180683 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 1, 2023).
[7] Id. (citing Pravin Bankers Assocs., Ltd. v. Banco Popular Del Peru , 109 F.3d 850, 855 (2d Cir. 1997)).
© 2026 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Loading comments…