Charles Duke of Brunswick v The King of Hanover: 13 Jan 1844

Discussion of the question whether a sovereign prince was liable to the jurisdiction of the Courts of a foreign country, in which he happens to be resident, and as to the liability to suit of one who unites in himself the characters both of an independent foreign sovereign and a subject.
A sovereign prince, resident in the dominions of another, is ordinarily exempt from the jurisdiction of the Courts there.
A foreign sovereign may sue in this country, both at law and in equity; and, if he sues in equity, he submits himself to the jurisdiction, and a cross-bill may be filed against him, which he must answer on oath ; but a foreign sovereign does not, by filing a bill in Chancery against A, making himself liable to be sued in that Court for an independent matter by B.
The King of Hanover, after his accession, renewed his oath of allegiance, to the Queen of England, and claimed the rights of an English peer. Held, that he was exempt from the jurisdiction of the English Courts for acts done by him as a sovereign prince, but was liable to be sued in those Courts in respect of matters done by him as a a subject. Held, also, that the sovereign character prevailed where the acts were done abroad, and also where it was doubtful in which of the two characters they had been done.
A foreign sovereign prince, who was also an English peer, was made a Defendant to a suit and served with a letter missive. The Lord Chancellor refused to recall it.
The Defendant then appeared, and filed a demurrer for want of jurisdiction. Held, first, that the Lord Chancellor had not decided that the Defendant was liable to the jurisdiction of the Court ; and, secondly, that the Defendant had not, by appearing, waived any defence to the bill.

Citations:

[1844] EngR 95, (1843-1844) 6 Beav 1, (1844) 49 ER 724

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromDuke of Brunswick v The King of Hanover HL 31-Jul-1948
The Duke claimed that the King of Hanover had been involved in the removal of the Duke from his position as reigning Duke and in the maladministration of his estates.
Held: ‘A foreign Sovereign, coming into this country cannot be made . .
CitedBelhaj and Another v Straw and Others SC 17-Jan-2017
The claimant alleged complicity by the defendant, (now former) Foreign Secretary, in his mistreatment by the US while held in Libya. He also alleged involvement in his unlawful abduction and removal to Libya, from which had had fled for political . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.304687