General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v The State of Libya: CA 3 Jul 2019
. .
. .
A design for sunglasses was challenged for prior publication. However the law in England differed from that apparently imposed from Europe as to the existence of a 12 month period of grace before applying for registration.
Held: Instruments . .
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
Whether activities outsourced by a state retained immunity under the 1978 Act. . .
The claimant pursued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the Immigration Service when his security clearance was withdrawn. The Tribunal allowed the respondent to use a closed material procedure under which it was provided with evidence unseen . .
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
References: [1939] AC 256 Coram: Lord Atkin The House considered the weight to be given to a certificate as to a statement by HM government as to the recognition of the defendant as a sovereign state: ‘Our State cannot speak with two voices on such a matter, the judiciary saying one thing, the executive another. … Continue reading Government of the Republic of Spain v SS ‘Arantzazu Mendi’: HL 1939
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The US established a base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, and provided educational services through its staff to staff families. The claimant a teacher employed at the base alleged that a report on her was defamatory. The defendant relied on state immunity. Held: A claim in libel was defeated by a claim of sovereign immunity. … Continue reading Holland v Lampen-Wolfe: HL 20 Jul 2000
The parties were involved in an international investment dispute arbitration. An injunction had been sought to prevent repatriation of assets to Bolivia. Held: The international system of arbitration was not subject to any national law and did not therefore amount to legal proceedings which would be capable of supporting the sort of relief claimed. The … Continue reading ETI Euro Telecom International Nv v Republic of Bolivia and Another: CA 28 Jul 2008
(Jurisdictional Points, Practice and Procedure) In advance of a preliminary hearing to determine whether the Appellant benefited from state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978, the First Respondent and the former Second Respondent (whose claim has since been withdrawn) sought an order for specific disclosure, following the standard disclosure previously given by the Appellant. … Continue reading Kuwait Investment Office v Hard: EAT 30 Mar 2022
The defendant argued that as Governor and Chief Excecutive of Bayelsa State in Nigeria he had sovereign immunity. The Foreign Office had issued a certificate that the defendant was not a Head of States under the 1978 Act. The A-G of Bayelsa had certified that the defendant was a head of State but the A-G … Continue reading Alamieyeseigha, Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 25 Nov 2005
LRA Beneficial Interests, Trusts and Restrictions : Restrictions Where No Beneficial Interest Dismemberment of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia; entry of restrictions; lex situs; private domestic law of England and Wales; occupation of property by a member of the Serbian diplomatic mission; principle of justiciability; ‘sufficient interest’; ‘right or claim’; Agreement on Succession Issues … Continue reading The Republic of Croatia v The Republic of Serbia: LRA 2 Jul 2009
The applicant sought habeas corpus to prevent his extradition to France.
Held: The English court was not to be concerned with facts underlying an extradition request. The laws of France were framed differently, but the facts alleged would . .