Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v HM Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbon y Borbon (Rev1) [2022] EWCA Civ 1595 (06 December 2022)

Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn v HM Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbon y Borbon (Rev1) [2022] EWCA Civ 1595 (06 December 2022)

On the face of the original pleadings, the acts alleged against the appellant and General Sanz Roldán were performed in their public capacities as head of state and director of the CNI, respectively, and thus attract state immunity under section 14(1) SIA. The judge erred in law by focusing on the nature of harassment as a private act and by failing to apply the 'colour of authority' test. The procedural handling of amendments and deferral of immunity issues was also in error. The appeal is allowed to the extent that the claim to functional immunity should have succeeded on the original pleadings.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 1595
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn; Defendant/appellant: His Majesty Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor María de Borbón y Borbón
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
State Immunity, Functional Immunity, Personal Injury Exception, Jurisdiction, Harassment, Amendment of Pleadings
Civil Procedure International Law State Immunity Functional Immunity Personal Injury Exception Jurisdiction Harassment Amendment of Pleadings

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Corinna Zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Sayn

Claimant/respondent

His Majesty Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor María de Borbón y Borbón

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as former head of state, is entitled to functional immunity under section 14(1) State Immunity Act 1978 for alleged acts of harassment prior to abdication.
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in approach to the legal test for functional immunity, focusing on the nature of the acts and the 'colour of authority' test.
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred procedurally in permitting amendments to the pleadings and in deferring determination of immunity issues.

Ratio Decidendi

On the face of the original pleadings, the acts alleged against the appellant and General Sanz Roldán were performed in their public capacities as head of state and director of the CNI, respectively, and thus attract state immunity under section 14(1) SIA. The judge erred in law by focusing on the nature of harassment as a private act and by failing to apply the 'colour of authority' test. The procedural handling of amendments and deferral of immunity issues was also in error. The appeal is allowed to the extent that the claim to functional immunity should have succeeded on the original pleadings.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration that the appellant is entitled to functional immunity under section 14(1) SIA in respect of the pre-abdication acts as pleaded in the original Particulars of Claim.
  • Permission to amend pleadings must be properly applied for and determined on evidence.