header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 March 2015 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Unconventional

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
piggot

Embassies’ employment immunities are in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, as Charles Pigott reports

In Benkharbouche and Janah v Embassy of the Republic of Sudan and others [2015] EWCA Civ 33, [2015] All ER (D) 51 the Court of Appeal had to decide whether ss 4 and 16 of the State Immunity Act 1978 (SIA 1978) were effective to bar employment claims in the UK from London embassy service staff.

Ms Benkharbouche is a Moroccan national who was employed as a cook at the Sudanese embassy. Ms Janah, also Moroccan, worked as a member of the domestic staff at the Libyan embassy. Both brought claims for unfair dismissal and breaches of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833). Ms Janah also brought claims for racial discrimination and harassment.

Their claims were dismissed by the employment tribunal. The issue before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) (which heard their appeals together in April 2013) and before the Court of Appeal was whether Art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) in effect

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll