header-logo header-logo

The Foreign Act of State doctrine: in the hot seat

108867
Does the Foreign Act of State doctrine apply at all when the foreign state itself seeks adjudication? Joseph Dyke & Anastasia Medvedskaya explore a tricky question for the English courts
  • The Foreign Act of State doctrine acts as a bar to the exercise of the English courts’ adjudicative jurisdiction.
  • Previous decisions had been clear that, if the doctrine was engaged by a case’s subject matter, it was not legally capable of being waived.
  • The Commercial Court has found that the doctrine does not apply in circumstances where it is a foreign state that positively seeks the English courts’ adjudication.

When it is engaged, the Foreign Act of State doctrine (FAOS) is a substantive bar to the English courts’ adjudicative jurisdiction. Cases concerning FAOS often have important political content (or ramifications), and thus it can sometimes have controversial results. But does FAOS apply at all when the foreign state itself seeks adjudication?

In Federal Republic of Nigeria v JPMorgan Chase Bank NA

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll