NML Capital Ltd v Republic of Argentina [2010] EWCA Civ 41, [2010] All ER (D) 57 (Feb)
If a claimant incorrectly identified the basis on which it asserted that a state was subject to the adjudicative jurisdiction of the English court, then the basis for the exercise of the jurisdiction was incorrect. It was not a mere procedural error which could later be remedied by altering the grounds, because it went to the very basis for invoking the jurisdiction against a sovereign state. It was, qualitatively speaking, in the same position as a failure to identify the correct cause of action or the correct ground for obtaining permission to serve out of the jurisdiction.
Section 31 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 did not constitute a jurisdiction provision which, effectively created another exception to the general rule that a foreign state was immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the UK when proceedings were brought in the UK courts for the recognition and enforcement
