Zoernsch v Waldock: CA 1964

A claim was lodged against a former president as well as the current secretary of the European Commission of Human Rights. The former president, Sir Humphrey Waldock, was under the 1960 Order entitled to ‘the like immunity from legal process as is accorded to an envoy of a foreign sovereign power’.
Held: With reference to (inter alia) Rahimtoola, that, after leaving office, state immunity continued to protect such an envoy from suit in respect of ‘acts performed in his official capacity’ or in respect of ‘acts done in the course of their official duties’. Where domestic legislation, although not incorporating the treaty, requires, either expressly or by necessary implication, resort to be had to its terms for the purpose of construing the legislation, the court may not only be empowered but required to adjudicate upon the meaning or scope of the terms of an international treaty.
Willmer LJ, Diplock LJ, Danckwerts LJ
[1964] 1 WLR 675
Council of Europe (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1960 (1960 No 442)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRahimtoola v Nizam of Hyderabad CA 1957
The court considered the doctrine of state immunity. Lord Denning MR said: ‘If the dispute brings into question, for instance, the legislative or international transactions of a foreign government, or the policy of its executive, the court should . .

Cited by:
CitedOccidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador CA 9-Sep-2005
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to . .
CitedMaclaine Watson and Co Ltd v International Tin Council HL 2-Jan-1989
The International Tin Council was a body constituted by an international treaty not incorporated into law in the United Kingdom. The ITC was also created a legal person in the United Kingdom by article 5 1972 Order.
Held: As a legal person in . .
CitedJones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception . .
CitedReyes v Al-Malki and Another SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant alleged that she had been discrimated against in her work for the appellant, a member of the diplomatic staff at the Saudi Embassy in London. She now appealed against a decision that the respondent had diplomatic immunity.
Held: . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.219520