Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Angelika Hellweger of Rahman Ravelli examines Bahrain v Shehabi, brought by two UK-based activists alleging spyware surveillance caused psychiatric injury.
By three votes to two, the court held that remotely deploying malware against computers in England could constitute an act within the jurisdiction under the State Immunity Act 1978.
Physical presence was unnecessary: conduct could occur through electronic or automated means.
Lord Leggatt dissented, arguing that the majority’s interpretation placed Britain ‘in breach of an international obligation’ and that reform should come through legislation or international agreement.
Hellweger says the decision could shape claims involving ransomware, surveillance and attacks on critical infrastructure.
It also exposes a wider constitutional tension: how far courts can adapt legislation drafted decades before the emergence of modern cybercrime.
