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 [2022] EWHC 1447 (Comm), [2022] All ER (D) 52

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll