header-logo header-logo

13 June 2013
Issue: 7564 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Sovereign immunity

Apex Global Management Ltd v Fi Call Ltd and others [2013] EWCA Civ 642, [2013] All ER (D) 81 (Jun)

Section 20(1)(b) of the State Immunity Act 1978 provided: “… the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 shall apply to: (a) a sovereign or other head of state; (b) members of his family forming part of his household...” There was no interpretational basis for giving the phrase ‘members of his family forming part of his household’ a wider meaning in relation to heads of state than in relation to diplomats. It was clear that Parliament did not think s 20 used the household concept more widely in relation to heads of state than to diplomats.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll