Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v HM Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbon y Borbon [2022] EWCA Civ 1052 (26 July 2022)

Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v HM Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbon y Borbon [2022] EWCA Civ 1052 (26 July 2022)

The Defendant is not a member of King Felipe VI's household within the meaning of s.20(1)(b) State Immunity Act 1978, as he neither lives with the King nor assists him in his functions; thus, he is not entitled to immunity under the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 as extended. The claim to functional immunity for pre-abdication acts is arguable and merits consideration at a full appeal, as the original pleading may have alleged acts in a public capacity.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 1052
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn; Defendant/applicant: His Majesty Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbón y Borbón
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Permission to Appeal From Order Dismissing Immunity Application
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused on ground 3 (household immunity); granted on grounds 1, 2, and 4 (functional immunity for pre-abdication acts); stay on proceedings to continue pending appeal.
Legal Topics
State Immunity, Diplomatic Immunity, Harassment, Jurisdiction, Heads of State
Civil Procedure International Law Immunity State Immunity Diplomatic Immunity Harassment Jurisdiction Heads of State

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn

Claimant/respondent

His Majesty Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbón y Borbón

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Permission to Appeal From Order Dismissing Immunity Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether former King Juan Carlos is entitled to immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978 and/or Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 as extended by the 1978 Act
  2. 2 Whether the acts alleged were performed in a public or private capacity for the purposes of immunity
  3. 3 Proper construction of 'household' under s.20(1)(b) State Immunity Act 1978

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant is not a member of King Felipe VI's household within the meaning of s.20(1)(b) State Immunity Act 1978, as he neither lives with the King nor assists him in his functions; thus, he is not entitled to immunity under the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 as extended. The claim to functional immunity for pre-abdication acts is arguable and merits consideration at a full appeal, as the original pleading may have alleged acts in a public capacity.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused on ground 3 (household immunity); granted on grounds 1, 2, and 4 (functional immunity for pre-abdication acts); stay on proceedings to continue pending appeal.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused on ground 3 (household immunity)
  • Permission to appeal granted on grounds 1, 2, and 4 (functional immunity for pre-abdication acts)