VZCZCXYZ0008
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHSJ #2523 3112244
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 072244Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6572
INFO RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SAN JOSE 002523 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR WHA/CEN 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EINV KIDE CS
SUBJECT: Costa Rica:  TFCA Eligibility and the Gesling Ranch case 
 
REF: 2005 SAN JOSE 02154 (B) email Sampliner - Finn AUG 08, 2006 
 
5:07PM 
 
1.(U) Summary. Despite a U.S. citizen landowner's continuing legal 
battle to receive compensation for an earlier nine-year confiscation 
of his property by the GOCR, the Embassy does not believe that the 
Costa Rican court system has so far failed to provide due process in 
the matter.  Embassy believes that Costa Rica meets the requirement 
under the Tropical Forest Conservation Act (TFCA) that a beneficiary 
country have an open investment regime, including the 
Administration's additional interpretive criterion that there are no 
outstanding nationalizations of American property since his property 
was returned. End Summary. 
 
2.(U) In 1983 the Government of Costa Rica (GOCR) confiscated lands 
known as the Gesling Ranch owned by Amcit James Gesling.  GOCR 
subsequently lifted the expropriation order in 1992 returning clear 
title to the owner.  Gesling began legal proceedings in 1995 to 
obtain compensation for loss of use of the ranch during the 
1983-1992 expropriation period.  In 1998 the Costa Rican court 
recognized the validity of Gesling's claims for damages and ordered 
an independent appraisal.  That same year the independent appraiser 
submitted findings which the Embassy believes was approximately $11 
million USD.  The GOCR objected to the amount and refused to pay. 
 
3.(U) The 1998 appraisal was never certified by the court.  No 
substantive movement occurred until October 2005, when the court 
reversed its decision finding that damage claims were unsupported. 
In reversing its earlier decision the court ruled that the GOCR was 
not liable for damages to Gesling because he failed to provide 
adequate business records to support specific figures on his 
losses. 
 
4.(U) On November 28, 2005, Gesling appealed the court's decision, 
an appeal that is still pending. 
 
5.(U)  Between 1999 and 2005 Gesling unsuccessfully requested on 
several occasions that the GOCR ministry of justice enter 
arbitration to determine a damage award. 
 
¶6. (U) Comment. Although it has been a slow process, and the 
claimant remains aggrieved, post does not believe that the Costa 
Rican courts have to date failed to provide due process.  Costa Rica 
has an open investment regime, one eligibility requirement for a 
country to be considered for debt relief under the Tropical Forest 
Conservation Act (TFCA).  Moreover, the Embassy believes that the 
treatment of the Gesling matter by the Costa Rican court system has 
so far accorded due process, thus meeting the Administration's 
additional interpretive criterion under the TFCA that there exist no 
outstanding cases of nationalizations of American property.  End 
Comment 
LANGDALE