Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

The Court of Appeal held that the judge erred in law by failing to focus on the alleged tortious conduct of the UK Services (sending questions to the CIA from England with knowledge of likely torture), by discounting the irrelevance of the claimant’s location and the Services’ indifference to it, and by undervaluing the strong connections to England. The significance of the Six Countries was minimal, while the connections to England were substantial. Therefore, it is substantially more appropriate for English law to apply to the claim, displacing the general rule under section 11 of the 1995 Act.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah); Respondent/defendant: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Respondent/defendant: The Home Office; Respondent/defendant: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Applicable Law in Tort, Vicarious Liability, Misfeasance in Public Office, Conspiracy to Injure, Trespass to the Person, False Imprisonment, Negligence, Conflict of Laws
Private International Law Tort Law Human Rights Applicable Law in Tort Vicarious Liability Misfeasance in Public Office Conspiracy to Injure Trespass to the Person +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah)

Appellant/claimant

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Respondent/defendant

The Home Office

Respondent/defendant

The Attorney General

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issue Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the applicable law for torts allegedly committed by UK security services in relation to mistreatment and torture of a detainee by the CIA in foreign countries?
  2. 2 Should the general rule under section 11 of the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 be displaced by section 12 in favour of English law?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the judge erred in law by failing to focus on the alleged tortious conduct of the UK Services (sending questions to the CIA from England with knowledge of likely torture), by discounting the irrelevance of the claimant’s location and the Services’ indifference to it, and by undervaluing the strong connections to England. The significance of the Six Countries was minimal, while the connections to England were substantial. Therefore, it is substantially more appropriate for English law to apply to the claim, displacing the general rule under section 11 of the 1995 Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside
  • Declaration that the law applicable to the claimant’s claim is the law of England and Wales