‘Two domestic workers who say they were exploited by a Saudi diplomat in London have won a major victory in the supreme court after judges ruled that their employer was no longer protected by diplomatic immunity.’
The Guardian, 18th October 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Before I embark on this little tale, let me put you straight. So long as they act in good faith, as they always do, judges incur no liability for erroneous decisions. So that’s alright, then. And the Crown has no liability for anything done by any person discharging judicial responsibilities? Not quite, as highlighted by LL v The Lord Chancellor [2017] EWCA Civ 237, [2017] All ER (D) 123 (Apr). If a court orders a person to be arrested or detained in contravention of Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights then that person is entitled to damages in a claim against the Crown (ss 7(1) and 9 of the Human Rights Act 1998) and proceedings would have to be brought against the Lord Chancellor (as if he didn’t have enough to worry about already). Detention will be unlawful if the court acted without jurisdiction (which is why judges should take the Green Book with them wherever they go) or where there was a gross and obvious irregularity in the court’s procedure or a flagrant denial of justice.’
New Law Journal, 7th July 2017
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘The most senior judge in England and Wales will hear a case attempting to overturn a ban on prosecuting Tony Blair over the Iraq war, the Guardian has learned.’
The Guardian, 5th July 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Ben Mansfield, barrister of The 36 Group, examines the judgment of Mr Justice Keehan in H (A Minor) v Northamptonshire County Council and the Legal Aid Agency [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam).’
Family Law Week, 23rd February 2017
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘Soldiers will be “shut out of justice” and military equipment failures will be covered up under plans to extend combat immunity and prevent military claims going to court, ministers have been warned.’
The Guardian, 14th February 2017
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Diplomatic officials working in Britain have allegedly used their immunity to avoid prosecution for serious criminal offences including child pornography and human trafficking, Boris Johnson has told parliament.’
The Guardian, 21st July 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A former model has been awarded a £53m cash settlement in a high court divorce battle with her Saudi billionaire ex-husband.’
The Guardian, 8th July 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The British military could face charges of corporate manslaughter under landmark changes in law being proposed by a parliamentary committee.’
The Independent, 24th April 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The parties were married in September 2001 and had one daughter born in October 2002. The husband, a Saudi national, was a businessman of substantial means who married again in 2012 when the parties’ marriage broke down. On their divorce the wife applied for financial relief under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. The husband applied to strike out the wife’s application , claiming immunity from suit as the permanent representative of St Lucia to the International Maritime Organisation (“IMO”), a post to which he had been appointed on 1 April 2014. The United Kingdom was required, as a matter of international law, to grant privileges and immunities to personal representatives of member states to the IMO in accordance with the Specialised Agencies Convention and the Headquarters Agreement. A permanent representative was entitled to the same immunity from suit and legal process as the head of a diplomatic mission, except that, by article 15 of the International Maritime Organisation (Immunities and Privileges) Order 2002), a permanent representative who was permanently resident in the United Kingdom was only entitled to immunities and privileges in respect of his official acts. The Foreign Secretary certified that the Foreign Office had been informed by the IMO of the husband’s appointment as permanent representative of St Lucia, of his arrival date and had not been notified that his diplomatic functions had terminated. Although on the face of it that certificate was conclusive evidence of the husband’s appointment by virtue of section 8 of the International Organisations Act 1968, the judge balanced the husband’s claim to immunity against the wife’s rights to access to the courts under article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. He concluded that the husband had not undertaken any duties or performed any functions as permanent representative, that the appointment was an artificial construct to defeat the wife’s claims on the breakdown of the marriage and that, since the husband was permanently resident in the United Kingdom, he was entitled to immunity only in respect of official acts performed in the exercise of his functions. In consequence the judge refused to strike out the wife’s claim.’
WLR Daily, 22nd March 2016
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Phillip Hammond, the foreign secretary, has taken the highly unusual step of criticising a high court judge’s decision to strip diplomatic immunity from a Saudi billionaire facing divorce proceedings from his estranged wife.’
The Guardian, 22nd March 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The Ministry of Defence has escaped prosecution over the deaths of three soldiers on an SAS selection course, only thanks to a convention that it is granted immunity, it has been confirmed.’
The Independent, 2nd March 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Individuals providing certain evidence to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse can do so without fear of prosecution.’
Attorney General’s Office, 9th July 2015
Source: www.gov.uk/ago
‘Theresa May has said the claims a police investigation into the late Liberal MP Cyril Smith was scrapped, and corruption blocked other historic police operations into child abuse, were “shocking and could lead to criminal prosecutions”.’
The Guardian, 17th March 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Domestic workers employed as members of the service staff of foreign diplomatic missions in the United Kingdom were entitled to bring proceedings asserting their employment rights against the employer state, in claims including unfair dismissal and breach of working time provisions, and such claims were not barred by the doctrine of state immunity pursuant to provisions in the State Immunity Act 1978.’
WLR Daily, 5th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The High Court has ruled that when long-running employment tribunal hearing collapsed as the result of the judge’s recusal due to apparent bias the claimants in the action could not obtain damages for wasted costs under section 6 of the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998 (specifically Article 6, the right to a fair trial) or the EU Charter.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 25th February 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A contract of employment between a serving diplomatic agent and a domestic worker in his official diplomatic residence was not to be characterised as “commercial activity” which the diplomatic agent exercised in the jurisdiction outside of his “official functions”, so that in a claim under the contract the agent was not deprived of his immunity from civil suit by the employee since such a dispute did not come within the exception to diplomatic immunity under article 31.1(c) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), scheduled to the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964.’
WLR Daily, 5th February 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The mother of a woman brutally murdered after a 999 delay has said she will take her case to the House of Commons to get “justice” for her daughter.’
BBC News, 17th February 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘This judgment concerned the conjoined appeals of Ms. Benkharbouche and Ms. Janah which arose from employment law claims brought against, respectively, the Sudanese and Libyan embassies. Certain of their claims, such as those for unfair dismissal, were founded on domestic law. Others, such as those under the Working Time Regulations 1998, fell within the scope of EU law. All were met with pleas of state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978.’
UK Human Rights Blog,
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2023