High Commissioner for Pakistan in the United Kingdom v Prince Muffakham Jah and Others [2019] – Blackstone Chambers

‘The High Court has determined a £35 million partition era dispute between India, Pakistan and successors in title to 7th Nizam of Hyderabad. Claims of Pakistan dismissed; claims of India, Prince Muffakham Jah and Prince Mukarram Jah upheld.’

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 2nd October 2019

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

Benkharbouche: EU Law reigns supreme (for now) & other important lessons – Cloisters

‘The legal press has mostly viewed Benkharbouche v SOS for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2017] UKSC 62 in the Supreme Court [“SC”] as a case which simply addresses the interplay between State Immunity and the Employment Tribunals. But, the other significance to this case is that it contains commentary the on the supremacy of EU Law, the role and significance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (“CFREU”) and the way in which it confers a free standing route to dis-applying primary legislation as well as raising questions on the impact of Brexit. It follows that it is essential reading for employment lawyers. Jacques Algazy QC analyses these issues in this blog.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 2nd November 2017

Source: www.cloisters.com

Supreme Court: state immunity rules incompatible with Article 6 – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted October 20th, 2017 in diplomats, news, state immunity, unfair dismissal by sally

‘If you work for an embassy in London and are not a UK national, you cannot sue your employing state when you get unfairly dismissed. But if you enter a commercial contract with the same embassy, you can sue them.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 20th October 2017

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

The long arm of the law: Belhaj and Rahmatullah (No.1) – UK Human Rights Blog

‘This blog is the first covering the series of three important judgments given on Tuesday by the Supreme Court on issues arising out of the War on Terror and the United Kingdom’s interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Belhaj and another v Straw and others) and Rahmatullah (No 1) v Ministry of Defence and another [2017] UKSC 3 involved the alleged complicity of United Kingdom officials in allegedly tortious acts of the UK or other states overseas. The torts alleged include unlawful detention and rendition, torture or cruel and inhuman treatment and assault.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 20th January 2017

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Angela Patrick: Blushes and Torture: Act of State Doctrine and Justiciability – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘In a week when Supreme Court watchers expected to dissect the Brexit judgment, the Justices instead handed down their long awaited decision in the joined cases of Belhaj & Ors v Straw & Ors; Rahmatullah (No 1) v Ministry of Defence & Ors [2017] UKSC 3. These appeals both involved unsuccessful attempts to strike out claims based on allegations of UK complicity in international wrongs – including torture and rendition and arbitrary detention – on the basis that our domestic courts should not exercise their jurisdiction in either case.’

Full story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 19th January 2017

Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org

The Law of International Custom in the Case Law of the House of Lords and the United Kingdom Supreme Court – 11KBW

Posted March 17th, 2015 in appeals, international law, news, state immunity, Supreme Court by sally

‘Tom Cross and Lord Collins of Mapesbury have co-authored a paper titled ‘The Law of International Custom in the Case Law of the House of Lords and the United Kingdom Supreme Court’ (2011), which is due to be published by the Council of Europe. The article discusses the status of customary international law in domestic law by reference to the leading cases.’

Full story

11KBW, 11th March 2015

Source: www.11kbw.com

Benkharbouche v Embassy of the Republic of Sudan (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and others intervening); Janah v Libya (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and others intervening) – WLR Daily

Benkharbouche v Embassy of the Republic of Sudan (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and others intervening); Janah v Libya (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and others intervening) [2015] EWCA Civ 33; [2015] WLR (D) 83

‘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

Unlawful detention: UK government ‘can be sued’, court rules – BBC News

Posted November 20th, 2014 in detention, jurisdiction, news, rendition, state immunity, torture by tracey

‘A Pakistani man can sue the UK government over claims he was unlawfully detained and tortured by British soldiers in Iraq, the High Court has ruled. Yunus Rahmatullah was captured in 2004, then sent from British to US custody and held for 10 years without charge.’

Full story

BBC News, 19th November 2014

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Angela Patrick: Suing the state: judicial competence, restraint and redress in Belhadj – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘The coverage of last week’s Court of Appeal’s decision in Belhadj & Or. v Straw & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 1394 has thus far generated more political heat than legal light. When a claim involves the suit of named officials and former Ministers for their alleged role in the rendition of a major political figure in the new Libya and his family to face torture under the Gaddafi regime, this is perhaps understandable. In a week where the Government – in the context of this claim – has conceded that it must disclose certain of its policies on surveillance and legal professional privilege, it is unsurprising that the press has had little time to digest the detail of this judgment.’

Full story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 7th November 2014

Source: http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog/

Finance and Divorce Update – Family Law Week

‘Jessica Craigs, senior solicitor at Mills & Reeve LLP, reviews the latest developments and judgments relating to marriage, divorce and financial remedies.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 11th July 2014

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Harb v Prince Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz – WLR Daily

Posted June 13th, 2014 in law reports, state immunity, succession by sally

Harb v Prince Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz [2014] EWHC 1807 (Ch); [2014] WLR (D) 248

‘A former head of state, regardless of how he ceased to hold office, only enjoyed immunity from suit in respect of official acts during his tenure in post. Therefore, where a sovereign ceased to be head of state on his death, the immunity enjoyed by his estate did not extend to matters of a private nature.’

WLR Daily, 9th June 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

State immunity does not avail Saudi Prince – UK Human Rights Blog

‘Rosalind English posted in January 2014 on Jones v. the United Kingdom, in which the Strasbourg Court decided that the inability of four men to bring torture compensation claims against Saudi Arabia in UK courts did not breach Article 6(1) of the Convention (access to court). The Court held that a grant of state immunity reflected generally recognised rules of public international law and so there had been no violation.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 9th June 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Saudi prince has no state immunity from £12 million ‘secret wife’ claim, court rules – Daily Telegraph

Posted June 10th, 2014 in financial provision, married persons, news, royal family, state immunity by sally

‘Decision by London court opens the way for a potentially embarrassing court case involving a British woman who claims she was secretly married to the late king of Saudi Arabia.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 9th June 2014

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

State immunity upheld against human rights challenges in Strasbourg – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The Strasbourg Court has ruled that the inability of four men to bring torture compensation claims against Saudi Arabia in UK courts did not breach the Convention. The Court held that a “grant of immunity to the state officials in the present case reflected generally recognised rules of public international law” and that there had been no violation of Article 6 (right of access to court).’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 18th January 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Rendition to Libya an “act of state” and therefore non-justiciable – UK Human Rights Blog

‘Belhaj and another v Straw and Others [2013] EWHC 4111 (QB) 20 December 2013. The High Court has struck out claims against British establishment defendants for “unlawful rendition”. The doctrine of immunity attaching to an act of state is total bar to that such claims and is not limited by the gravity of the alleged violation of rights.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 14th January 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Saudi Arabia ‘torture’ Britons told they cannot sue – BBC News

Posted January 15th, 2014 in appeals, damages, human rights, news, Saudi Arabia, state immunity, torture by tracey

‘Four British men have failed to overturn a decision by the UK’s highest court which stopped them suing Saudi Arabia for alleged torture. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that the men’s human rights had not been breached by the British court’s decision.’

Full story

BBC News, 14th January 2014

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

International Human Rights Breaches – State Accountability v State Immunity – UCL / Bindman Debate

Posted July 19th, 2013 in human rights, international law, news, state immunity by sally

“Panel includes:
Prof. Eileen Denza CMG;
Omar Deghayes, Cageprisoners, former Guantanamo prisoner;
Ben Emmerson QC, Matrix Chambers; and
Julian Knowles QC, Matrix Chambers

Professor Geraldine Van Bueren QC, Queen Mary’s College, London”

Video now available

UCL / Bindman Debate, 19th June 2013

Source www.ucl.ac.uk

Iraq soldier families can bring negligence but not human rights claims – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted November 9th, 2012 in armed forces, human rights, negligence, news, state immunity by tracey

“Smith & Ors v The Ministry of Defence [2012] EWCA Civ 1365

Last month, the Court of Appeal decided that the negligence claims of the families of five British soldiers killed on duty in Iraq could go ahead. It would be for the High Court to decide on the facts whether decisions made about troops’ equipment and training fell within the long-standing doctrine of ‘combat immunity’.  The appellants were however unsuccessful in arguing that the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) applied.

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 9th November 2012

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

SerVaas Inc v Rafidain Bank – WLR Daily

Posted August 31st, 2012 in debts, enforcement, international law, law reports, state immunity, third parties by tracey

SerVaas Inc v Rafidain Bank: [2012] UKSC 40;   [2012] WLR (D)  257

“Whether property was ‘for the time being in use or intended for use for commercial purposes’ within the meaning of section 13(4) of the State Immunity Act 1978 did not depend on the property’s origin but on the use to which the state had chosen to put it.”

WLR Daily, 17th August 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Co (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted June 29th, 2012 in arbitration, conflict of laws, enforcement, law reports, state immunity by tracey

Yukos Capital Sarl v OJSC Rosneft Oil Co (No 2): [2012] EWCA Civ 855;  [2012] WLR (D)  186

“Act of state doctrines did not go so far as to prevent examination of the substantial justice available in the courts of foreign jurisdictions, whether in a particular case or on a systemic basis. Where there was a jurisdiction to enforce a foreign award, it was open to the court to look at whether the case had been fairly decided. Where a party to the litigation was asking the English court to recognise a foreign court decision, the English court must be entitled to decide whether or not to enforce the foreign court decision.”

WLR Daily, 27th June 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk