This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

State Immunities From Municipal Jurisdiction - International Law

Notice: PDF Preview
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our International Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting.
See Original

Under customary IL, the state itself is absolutely immune from the exercise of jurisdiction by local courts in respect of sovereign acts of state (juri imperii).

  1. The immunity is absolute in respect of sovereign acts, even for serious violations of international human rights law, the law of armed conflict or rules of jus cogens (Jurisdictional Immunities case)

  2. The state and its trading agencies do not enjoy immunity in respect of private commercial acts (jure gestionis).

Two questions arise in deciding if a government department or separate agency should enjoy immunity. If both are answered positively, the state can claim immunity.

  1. Is the entity part of the state?

The UN Convention on Immunities Art 2(1)(b) provides that a State includes [choose whichever relevant]

  • the state and its various organs of govt, constituent units of a federation, agencies or instrumentalities of the state, and the representatives of state acting in that capacity.

The UK Court of Appeal in Trendtex Trading held that to be part of the state, an entity must be so related to the government of the state as to form party of it.

  • It held that the Central Bank of Nigeria, despite having government functions of issuing legal tender and safeguarding the value of currency, as well as acting as bank and financial adviser to the government and being under a great deal of government control was not a department of the Federation of Nigeria.

  1. Is the act done in the exercise of sovereign authority (‘governmental’)?

Governmental acts, according to Lord Wilberforce in the I Congreso case, are those where not only is ‘the purpose or motive of the act… to serve the purposes of the state’ but ‘the act is of its own character a governmental act, as opposed to an act which any private citizen can perform…’

Governmental acts attracting immunity (ie not having a commercial purpose) have been held to include:

  • Defamation taking place by the US in the context of military educational training in a UK base (Holland v Lampen-Wolfe, HOL)

  • Negligent medical treatment by the US at an American military hospital in the UK (Littrell v USA (No 2), Court of Appeal)

  • Purchase of military equipment (Castro v Saudi Arabia)

  • Publication of libel in a journal that was an official commentary of the Soviet Union (Yessenin-Volpin v Novosti Press Agency)

  • Maintenance of medical offices by the Egyptian Embassy (Arab Republic of Egypt v Gama-Eldin)

Individuals acting in state capacity will be protected by state immunity. If the following two questions are answered positively, the individual is entitled to claim immunity.

  1. Is [X] an individual in a role to whom immunity attaches?

  • The immunity clearly extends to heads of state, heads of government and senior government officials (such as ministers of government) (Arrest Warrant case)

  • Immunity extends to individuals carrying out acts of state; however, it is unsettled which level and kind of state official is entitled to claim immunity from municipal jurisdiction....

Buy the full version of these
notes or essay plans and more.
International Law

More International Law Samples

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.