Database

The immunities of States and international organisations

This database contains the original national contributions bringing together information on The immunities of States and international organisations

Information on the contribution

Member State
Spain
Themes
Type of document
Jurisprudence
Permanent link to the contribution
http://www.cahdidatabases.coe.int/C/Immunities/Spain/1986/244
Attachments
Translations
THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE QUOTED AS FOLLOWS:
Database of the CAHDI "The immunities of States and international organisations" - contribution of Spain - Jurisprudence of 10/02/1986

Emilio M.B. (individual) v. Embassy of Guinea Ecuatorial (State)

Author(ity)

Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo)

Date of the decision, of the judgment

10/02/1986

Points of law

The Supreme Court adopts the limited theory of jurisdictional immunities, and establishes that Spanish courts are competent in cases related to labour law where foreign States are sued.

Summary of the case

For the first time, and changing its previous jurisprudence (see, e.g., judgment of the same Social Chamber of the Supreme Court of 8 November 1979), the Supreme Court accepts the limited theory of jurisdictional immunities, and the distinction between acta iure gestionis and acta iure imperii. The judgement also states that immunities arising out of the Viena Convention on Diplomatic Relations are different from those granted by international law to States as such, and that a restrictive doctrine should be applied to the latter as concern jurisdictional immunities. Finally, the judgement admits that the rejection of jurisdictional immunities does not mean the automatic denial of the immunities of execution, i.e. the prohibition to adopt measures of constraint on certain property of foreign States according to international law. In the latter case, the Supreme Court recommends to consult the Department of International Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs before the adoption of any measure of constraint.

Sources

Aranzadi, 1986, No. 727

Additional information (explanations, notes, etc.)

Confirmed by Supreme Court decision of 1 December 1986 (Aranzadi, 1986, No. 7231).