header-logo header-logo

Supreme Court rules on scope of immunity

12 March 2025
Issue: 8108 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , International , Tribunals , Discrimination
printer mail-detail
An embassy is not protected by state immunity from employment tribunal claims, the Supreme Court has held.

The case concerned Antoinette Costantine, a former secretary at the embassy in London who claimed discrimination and harassment on the basis of religious belief. The embassy countered that it was protected by the State Immunity Act 1978.

Ruling in The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Costantine [2025] UKSC 9 last week, however, the court held the tribunal judge did not err in law when they found Costantine’s employment was not an exercise of sovereign authority and immunity did not apply because her job was administrative with no access to confidential information.

The embassy appealed to the Court of Appeal but sought an adjournment then declined to attend.

The Supreme Court held the Court of Appeal, which dismissed the embassy’s appeal for non-appearance, failed in its duty to consider whether state immunity applied where the embassy did not attend and was not entitled simply to dismiss the appeal.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll