State Immunity Act 1978 (UK) and Hazel Fox, The Law of State Immunity, 2002

Keyword(s):  
2003 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Voyiakis

This comment discusses three recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases of McElhinney v Ireland, Al-Adsani v UK, and Fogarty v UK. All three applications concerned the dismissal by the courts of the respondent States of claims against a third State on the ground of that State's immunity from suit. They thus raised important questions about the relation the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention)—especially the right to a fair trial and access to court enshrined in Arcticle 6(1)—and the law of State immunity.


Author(s):  
Fox Hazel ◽  
Webb Philippa

Revised and updated to include recent developments since 2013, this new edition provides a detailed guide to the operation of the international rule of State immunity which bars one State's national courts from exercising criminal or civil jurisdiction over claims made against another State. Building on the analysis of its two previous editions, it reviews relevant material at both international and national levels with particular attention to US and UK law; the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of the State and its Property (not yet in force), and also seeks to assess the significance of recent changes in the evolution of the law. Although the restrictive doctrine of immunity is now widely observed by which foreign States may be sued in national courts for their commercial transactions, the immunity rule remains controversial, not only by reason of the recognition of a single State's right to deny a remedy for a wrong — China, a major trading State, continues to adhere to the absolute bar — but also by the exclusion of any reparation or relief for the commission on the orders of a State of grave human rights violations. The complexity and moral challenge of the issues is illustrated by high profile cases. The expanding extraterritorial jurisdiction of national courts with regard to torture in disregard of pleas of act of State and nonjusticiability offers a further challenge to the exclusionary nature and continued observance of State immunity. Recent developments in key areas are examined, including: impleading; public policy and non-justiciability; universal civil jurisdiction for reparation for international crimes; the application of the employment exception to embassies and diplomats; immunity from enforcement and procedural measures; immunity of State officials, and tensions between national constitutional requirements and superior international norms.


Author(s):  
Fox Hazel

This chapter provides an account of the immunities of the State, its officials, and state agencies in international law. It first offers a general description of the plea of state immunity and a brief historical account of the development of the law of state immunity. Then it briefly sets out the law relating to the immunities of the State itself as a legal person, followed by the law applicable to its officials and to state agencies. In addition an account based on customary international law will be provided on the immunities of senior state officials. The chapter concludes by taking note of the extent to which the practice of diplomatic missions at the present time accords with requirements of state immunity law as now set out in written form in the 2004 UN Convention on the Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property.


2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-250
Author(s):  
P. D. Mora
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-481
Author(s):  
Lawrence Collins

  The article links the 1927 decision of the House of Lords in Duff Development Co Ltd v Government of Kelantan to the history of Captain Duff in Kelantan and its place in British colonial history and its role in the modern law of state immunity and international arbitration.


2021 ◽  
Vol 196 ◽  
pp. 593-628

593Arbitration — Arbitration award — International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (“ICSID”) — ICSID Convention, 1965 — Article 54 — Recognition and enforcement of award — Distinction between enforcement and recognition proceedings — International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) implementing ICSID Convention in domestic law — Whether ICSID Convention excluding any claim for foreign state immunity in proceedings for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award — Meaning of recognition and enforcement in Article 54 and execution in Article 55 of ICSID Convention — Whether Spain’s accession to ICSID Convention constituting a submission to jurisdiction of Federal Court of AustraliaRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — ICSID Convention, 1965 — International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) — Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 (Cth) — Whether Spain entitled to plead foreign State immunity — Whether ICSID Convention excluding any claim for foreign state immunity in proceedings for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award — Meaning of recognition and enforcement in Article 54 and execution in Article 55 of ICSID Convention — Whether Spain’s accession to ICSID Convention constituting a submission to jurisdiction of Federal Court of AustraliaTreaties — Interpretation — ICSID Convention, 1965 — Articles 54 and 55 — Meaning of recognition and enforcement in Article 54 and execution in Article 55 of ICSID Convention — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Whether ICSID Convention excluding any claim for foreign state immunity in proceedings for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award — Whether Spain’s accession to ICSID Convention constituting a submission to jurisdiction of Federal Court of AustraliaState immunity — Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 (Cth) — Exceptions to immunity — Exception where foreign State agreeing by treaty to submit to jurisdiction — Spain acceding to ICSID Convention — Whether constituting submission to jurisdiction of Federal Court of Australia — Whether Spain entitled to plead foreign State immunity — Whether ICSID Convention excluding any claim for foreign State immunity in proceedings for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award594Jurisdiction — State immunity — Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 (Cth) — Spain acceding to ICSID Convention — Whether constituting submission to jurisdiction of Federal Court of Australia — Whether Spain entitled to plead foreign State immunity — Whether Federal Court of Australia having jurisdiction — The law of Australia


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (22) ◽  
pp. 133-138
Author(s):  
Vladislav Starzhenetskiy ◽  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document