Lysongo v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office & Anor

Lysongo v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office & Anor

The High Court has no jurisdiction to hear the claim because the relevant international instruments are not part of English law, the Trusteeship Agreement does not create enforceable rights under English law, and both the act of state and state immunity doctrines bar the proceedings.

Parties
Claimant: Makweley Lysongo; First Defendant: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Second Defendant: The Government of La Republique du Cameroun
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction
Outcome
claim struck out
Legal Topics
State Immunity, Act of State Doctrine, Jurisdiction, Trusteeship, Decolonisation
Public International Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law State Immunity Act of State Doctrine Jurisdiction Trusteeship Decolonisation

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makweley Lysongo

Claimant

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

First Defendant

The Government of La Republique du Cameroun

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to hear claims arising from the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement over British Southern Cameroons?
  2. 2 Can the claimant rely on international instruments not incorporated into English law?
  3. 3 Does state immunity bar proceedings against Cameroon?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has no jurisdiction to hear the claim because the relevant international instruments are not part of English law, the Trusteeship Agreement does not create enforceable rights under English law, and both the act of state and state immunity doctrines bar the proceedings.

Court Disposition

claim struck out

Orders

  • The claimant’s claim is struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) and CPR 11.
  • The Court will hear the parties on consequential orders.