JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITY OF A FOREIGN STATE UNDER ENGLISH LAW
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article examines the current trends in the legal regulation of relations on granting jurisdictional immunity to a foreign state in the legal systems of foreign countries in the example of Great Britain. The author identifies the basic principles of development of this institution in the UK, their reflection on the rules of English law, and emphasizes the existence of problems associated with the application of state immunity in private law relations. The author substantiates the expediency of analyzing the most optimal legal positions reflected in UK legislation and tested in world practice. The author analyzes in detail the UK State Immunity Act 1978 and shows the role of case law in this process. The author analyzes the origins of limited immunity in the UK and provides a comparative description of English law and American law.
The paper looks at the methodological underpinnings of England's jurisdictional immunity in private international law and its theoretical and legal underpinnings. The author identifies the primary categories of state immunity, describes the idea and its features, and examines the underlying factors that led to developing a state's jurisdictional immunity. The two primary theories of state jurisdictional immunity under English law — absolute immunity and functional (limited) immunity — are examined by the author. The author gives particular consideration to the legal framework governing the State's jurisdictional immunity at the international and national levels. The author outlines the key elements of England's jurisdictional immunity doctrine about foreign private law contacts.
The scope of relationships in which the state may act as a subject of international law is defined by the author, who also looks at the immunity of the state as a subject of private international law. The State's sovereignty is seen as the foundation for immunity. The fundamental ideas of jurisdictional immunity in England are examined by the author, including absolute immunity and functional (limited) immunity, as well as how they are reflected in both national and international legal frameworks.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Bankas, E. K. (2005). The state immunity controversy in international law: Private suits against sovereign states in domestic courts. Springer.
Bloddget, M. (2002). Commercial Activity Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act: Gateway to Global Business and Ethics. International Business Law Journal, 71-73.
Brohmer, J. (1997). State Immunity and the Violation of Human Rights. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Caplan, L. M. (2003). State Immunity, Human Rights, and Jus Cogens: A Critic of the Normative Hierarchy Theory. American Journal of International Law, 97(4), 744.
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (with Protocols) (European Convention on Human Rights) of November 4, 1950. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004#Text
Denisov, V. N. (1999). Immunity of the state. In Y. S. Shemshuchenko (Ed.), Legal encyclopedia: In 6 vols. (Vol. 2, p. 668). M.P. Bazhan Ukrainian Encyclopedia Publishing House.
Dicey, A. V. (1907). Fundamentals of English State Law: An Introduction to the Study of the English Constitution (P. G. Vinogradov, Ed., 2nd ed.). Tip. I.D. Sytin.
European Convention on the Immunity of States (ETS N 74) (Basel, May 16, 1972). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_060#Text
Fox, N. (Year). State Responsibility and Tort Proceedings against a Foreign State in Municipal Courts. NYIL, 20, 24-25.
Fox, N. (2002). The Law of State Immunity. Oxford University Press.
Gaidey, K. M. (2014). Al-Adsani v. Great Britain: Universal Civil Jurisdiction Against State Immunity. Actual Problems of Politics: Scientific Professional Publication of the Odesa Law Academy, 52, 115-123.
Korniychuk, Y. (2008). Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property: Development Trends in International and Domestic Law. National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, V.M. Koretsky Institute of State and Law.
Lauterpacht, H. (1951). The Problem of Jurisdictional Immunities of Foreign States. British Yearbook of International Law, 28, 220.
Redfern, A., Hunter, M., Blackaby, N., & Parasites, C. (2004). Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration (Section 10-62).
Malanchuk, P. (2000). Introduction to International Law According to Eickhurst (M. V. Buromensky, Ed., 8th ed.). Consum.
Poudret, J.-F., & Besson, S. (2007). Comparative Law of International Arbitration (2nd ed.). Thomson, Sweet, and Maxwell.
Rahimtoola v. Nizam of Hyderabad (1958). International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 7, 176-187.
Sinclair, I. M. (1973). The European Convention on State Immunity. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 22(2), 267.
Sinclair, I. (1980). The Law of Sovereign Immunity. Collected Courts of the Hague Academy of International Law, II, 167, 121.
Skakun, O. F. (2008). General Comparative Jurisprudence: The Main Types (Families) of Legal Systems of the World. In Yure Publishing House.
Sornarajah, M. (1982). Problems in Applying the Restrictive Theory of Sovereign Immunity. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Oxford University Press, 31(4), 668.
Sucharitkul, S. (1959). State Immunities and Trading Activities in International Law. Stevens & Sons Limited.
Timashova, V. M. (2015). Formation of the Concept of State Immunity: A Historiological Aspect. Foreign Trade: Economics, Finance, Law, 4, 148.
UK State Immunity Act. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/33
United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property of December 2, 2004. UN General Assembly Resolution 59/38 of December 16, 2004. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_e50#Text
United States Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (1978). US Statutes at Large, Washington, D.C., 90(2), 2891.
Warbrick, C. (1986). Executive Certificates in Foreign Affairs: Prospects of Review and Control. *International and Comparative Law Quarterly*, Oxford University Press, 35(1), 146-157.