Points of law

1) A contract with a civilian of the sending State to teach members of a military base of that State on the territory of the UK, is a matter which is excluded from the State Immunity Act, which does not apply to "anything done by or in relation to the armed forces of a State whilst present in the UK" (s.16(2)). It is therefore governed by the common law of State immunity;

2) In determining whether it was an act iure imperii or iure gestionis, the defendant’s assessment of the plaintiff's provision of educational services to members of the base had to be viewed in its context, including taking account the persons involved and the place in which the acts took place;

3) The impugned assessment of the plaintiff’s teaching related to the standard of education which the sending State afforded to its own servicemen. It was therefore a matter within its own sovereign authority;

4) In recognising the immunity of the sending State in this case, there was no violation of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 6 provides procedural guarantees in relation to due process, but does not in itself provide a basis of jurisdiction where this is not permitted under international law.

Summary of the case

n/a

Sources

[2000] 3 All ER 833

Additional information (explanations, notes, etc.)

n/a