Wokuri v Kassam [2012] EWHC 105 (Ch) (30 January 2012)

Wokuri v Kassam [2012] EWHC 105 (Ch) (30 January 2012)

The defendant is not entitled to residual diplomatic immunity under Article 39(2) of the Vienna Convention because the employment of the claimant as a domestic servant was a private act, not performed in the exercise of official functions as a member of the mission.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 105 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Ms Daphine Wokuri; Defendant: Ms Mumtaz Kassam
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application to Discharge Previous Order and Challenge Jurisdiction Based on Diplomatic Immunity
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Diplomatic Immunity, Employment Contracts, Jurisdiction, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations
Employment Law Public International Law Diplomatic Immunity Employment Contracts Jurisdiction Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Daphine Wokuri

Claimant

Ms Mumtaz Kassam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application to Discharge Previous Order and Challenge Jurisdiction Based on Diplomatic Immunity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant, as a former diplomat, is entitled to residual diplomatic immunity under Article 39(2) of the Vienna Convention in respect of employment claims brought by a domestic servant

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant is not entitled to residual diplomatic immunity under Article 39(2) of the Vienna Convention because the employment of the claimant as a domestic servant was a private act, not performed in the exercise of official functions as a member of the mission.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Ms Kassam's application to discharge the order of 4 October 2011 is dismissed.