Dynasty Company for Oil and Gas Trading Ltd v Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq & Anor

Dynasty Company for Oil and Gas Trading Ltd v Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq & Anor

Dr Hawrami is immune from suit because the KRG, as a separate entity of Iraq, was exercising the sovereign authority of Iraq in relation to the management of oil and gas resources under the Iraqi Constitution; the acts in question were sovereign acts (jure imperii); as a servant of the KRG, Dr Hawrami is entitled to the same immunity; service on him was valid and did not require SIA s.12 procedure; even if immunity did not apply, the courts of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq are the more appropriate forum and the proceedings would be stayed for forum non conveniens.

Parties
Claimant: Dynasty Company for Oil and Gas Trading Limited; First Defendant: The Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq; Second Defendant: Dr Ashti Hawrami
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Jurisdictional Challenge (commercial Court) / Ruling on Application to Contest Jurisdiction Under CPR Part 11
Outcome
Jurisdiction declined; claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction under the State Immunity Act 1978.
Legal Topics
State Immunity, Forum Non Conveniens, Foreign Act of State, Service of Process, Production Sharing Contracts, Oil and Gas Law
Public International Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law State Immunity Forum Non Conveniens Foreign Act of State Service of Process Production Sharing Contracts +1 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dynasty Company for Oil and Gas Trading Limited

Claimant

The Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq

First Defendant

Dr Ashti Hawrami

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Jurisdictional Challenge (commercial Court) / Ruling on Application to Contest Jurisdiction Under CPR Part 11

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Hawrami is immune from suit under the State Immunity Act 1978 (SIA)
  2. 2 Whether service on Dr Hawrami was valid or should have followed SIA s.12 procedure
  3. 3 Whether the claim is non-justiciable by reason of the foreign act of state doctrine

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Hawrami is immune from suit because the KRG, as a separate entity of Iraq, was exercising the sovereign authority of Iraq in relation to the management of oil and gas resources under the Iraqi Constitution; the acts in question were sovereign acts (jure imperii); as a servant of the KRG, Dr Hawrami is entitled to the same immunity; service on him was valid and did not require SIA s.12 procedure; even if immunity did not apply, the courts of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq are the more appropriate forum and the proceedings would be stayed for forum non conveniens.

Court Disposition

Jurisdiction declined; claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction under the State Immunity Act 1978.

Orders

  • Declaration that the court has no jurisdiction pursuant to the SIA.
  • If immunity had not applied, proceedings would have been stayed on grounds of forum non conveniens.