Claimant v The Government of Kuwait
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal determined it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant's employment involved functions sufficiently close to governmental functions of the mission that his employment was an exercise of sovereign authority. The claim was therefore barred by state immunity under sections 1, 14 and 16 of the State Immunity Act 1978 and dismissed.
The tribunal determined it had no jurisdiction to hear the race discrimination claim because the claimant's employment involved functions sufficiently close to governmental functions of the mission that his employment was an exercise of sovereign authority. The claim was therefore barred by state immunity under sections 1, 14 and 16 of the State Immunity Act 1978 and dismissed.
Facts
The claimant was employed by the Government of Kuwait as Director of Academic Affairs at the Kuwait Cultural Office (part of the Kuwaiti diplomatic mission) from December 2014. His role involved negotiating with UK universities on behalf of the mission, conducting official visits to universities to inspect facilities and protect interests of Kuwaiti students, accompanying Kuwaiti government delegations, approving leave requests, and signing financial guarantee letters. He was a Head of Department and during one period acted in the role of Cultural Attaché. He brought claims for unfair dismissal and race discrimination.
Decision
The tribunal determined that the claimant's functions were sufficiently close to the governmental functions of the diplomatic mission that his employment was an exercise of sovereign authority. Applying Benkharbouche and Costantine, the tribunal found that his negotiating contracts, conducting official visits representing the mission, accompanying government delegations, and protecting interests of Kuwaiti nationals were inherently sovereign functions. The claims were therefore barred by state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978 and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Practical note
Employment tribunal claims against foreign states can be barred by state immunity even for administrative/technical embassy staff if their functions involve personal involvement in the diplomatic or political operations of the mission, such as negotiating on behalf of the state or conducting official visits to represent governmental interests.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2202196/2022
- Decision date
- 1 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Director of Academic Affairs
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No