The Court considered a seizure of property from the plaintiff which had then been adopted by the Russian Government and a later confiscation decree.
Held: The decree was effective to vest the goods in the Russian authorities and the adopted seizure was an act of state the validity of which could not be questioned.
Judges:
Scrutton and Sankey LJJ
Citations:
[1929] 1 KB 718
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Oetjen v Central Leather Co 1918
(US Supreme Court) Animal hides were seized and sold to satisfy a monetary assessment to support the revolution, and there was an issue of title between an assignee from the original owner and a person deriving his claim to title from the purchaser . .
Cited by:
Cited – Korea National Insurance Company v Allianz Global Corporate and Specialty Ag ComC 18-Nov-2008
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment for payment of a sum under a policy of insurance. The defendant sought to refuse saying that the policy had been instigated by a fraud perpetrated by the state of North Korea, and or that the judicial system . .
Cited – Belhaj 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.
International
Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.316671