Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2025] EWCA Civ 1162 (11 September 2025)

Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2025] EWCA Civ 1162 (11 September 2025)

The Court of Appeal held that the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal test in determining that Ms Alhayali's employment functions were not sufficiently close to the exercise of sovereign authority to attract state immunity under s 4 of the State Immunity Act 1978. The court restored the ET's decision, finding no error of law. The court further held that the claim for psychiatric injury fell within the personal injury exception in s 5, following binding authority. The issue of waiver was academic given the outcome on immunity, but the court expressed concerns about the current law on waiver and ostensible authority.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 1162
Parties
Appellant/respondent: THE ROYAL EMBASSY OF SAUDI ARABIA (CULTURAL BUREAU); Respondent/claimant: MS ABIR ALHAYALI
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's decision restored
Legal Topics
State Immunity, Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction, Waiver of Immunity, Personal Injury (psychiatric), Discrimination, EU Law Derived Claims
Employment Law Public International Law State Immunity Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction Waiver of Immunity Personal Injury (psychiatric) Discrimination EU Law Derived Claims

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE ROYAL EMBASSY OF SAUDI ARABIA (CULTURAL BUREAU)

Appellant/respondent

MS ABIR ALHAYALI

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) is entitled to state immunity under s 4 of the State Immunity Act 1978 in respect of Ms Alhayali's EU law-derived employment claims
  2. 2 Whether the claim for compensation for psychiatric injury falls within the personal injury exception to immunity under s 5 of the State Immunity Act 1978
  3. 3 Whether the Embassy validly waived state immunity by its solicitors' conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal test in determining that Ms Alhayali's employment functions were not sufficiently close to the exercise of sovereign authority to attract state immunity under s 4 of the State Immunity Act 1978. The court restored the ET's decision, finding no error of law. The court further held that the claim for psychiatric injury fell within the personal injury exception in s 5, following binding authority. The issue of waiver was academic given the outcome on immunity, but the court expressed concerns about the current law on waiver and ostensible authority.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's decision restored

Orders

  • Set aside the decision of Bourne J in the Employment Appeal Tribunal
  • Restore the order of the Employment Tribunal that the Embassy does not have state immunity under s 4 of the State Immunity Act 1978