A unanimous U.S. federal appeals court has upheld the dismissal, with prejudice, of a lawsuit brought by former TRG Pakistan CEO Zia Chishti against former Afiniti employee Tatiana Spottiswoode and her lawyers. The decision rejects Chishti’s defamation, false light, breach of contract and related claims.
Arbitration Award Left Undisturbed
The ruling leaves undisturbed the 2019 arbitration award issued in Spottiswoode’s favour and affirms the dismissal of Chishti’s attempt to have that award rescinded. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit did not review or decide the merits of the UK settlement.
Following a separate settlement of libel proceedings against The Telegraph in the United Kingdom in March 2025, Chishti and his wife publicly portrayed the outcome as a vindication, stating that the allegations against him were false and that he had cleared his name.
UK Settlement Does Not Affect US Rulings
The July 2026 judgment highlights that the settlement did not overturn the separate arbitration result in the United States or invalidate the findings underlying Spottiswoode’s congressional testimony. The dispute before the federal courts arose after Spottiswoode testified before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in November 2021.
Her testimony concerned allegations that had previously been addressed in confidential arbitration proceedings, which concluded with a 2019 award in her favour. Spottiswoode’s testimony formed part of congressional consideration of legislation addressing mandatory arbitration in workplace sexual assault and sexual harassment disputes. The legislation was subsequently enacted into law.
Claims of Defamation and Breach of Confidentiality
Chishti later sued Spottiswoode, members of her legal team and others, alleging that her congressional testimony, media interviews and social media statements were defamatory. He also alleged that disclosures connected with the arbitration violated confidentiality obligations and caused him professional, reputational and financial harm.
In affirming the dismissal, the appellate court repeated the district court’s characterization of the litigation as “a not-so-thinly veiled attempt to undo the outcome of an arbitration that rejected Chishti’s account of events and ruled in Spottiswoode’s favour.”
Legislative Privilege Protects Congressional Testimony
The appeals court held that Spottiswoode’s written and oral statements to Congress were protected by an absolute legislative privilege. The court noted that she had testified pursuant to a congressional subpoena and that her statements directly related to legislation then under consideration.
The court also held that statements made by Spottiswoode and her attorney to The Telegraph, along with related social media posts, were either protected opinions or covered by applicable reporting and comment privileges under District of Columbia law.
Clear Legal Distinction Reinforced
The ruling therefore reinforces a clear legal distinction. The March 2025 Telegraph settlement resolved separate UK libel proceedings, but it did not erase the 2019 arbitration award, reverse its outcome or prevent U.S. courts from rejecting Chishti’s later claims.
The decision adds to a series of adverse U.S. rulings involving Chishti. In separate proceedings, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that several claims pursued by Chishti against TRG entities had already been released under a 2022 settlement agreement.
Additional Court Rulings Against Chishti
That court also found that transfers of assets to Chishti’s spouse had been made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and ordered the turnover of assets to TRG in connection with an arbitration award against him.
