Cases→2200107/2023

Claimant v Qatar Embassy

16 July 2024Before Employment Judge L BrownLondon Centralin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The claim was dismissed because the tribunal found that the claimant's employment as a Protocol Officer was an act of sovereign authority, sufficiently close to the core diplomatic functions of representing the sending State and protecting its nationals. His role greeting Royal Family members at airports and interfacing with UK immigration officials on their behalf was inherently governmental work that a private person could not undertake, thus engaging state immunity under s16 State Immunity Act 1978.

Facts

The claimant, a UK national, was employed by Qatar Embassy as a Protocol Officer from February 2014 to September 2022. His role involved greeting dignitaries and Royal Family members at airports, arranging transport, and crucially, accompanying Royal Family members to immigration, interpreting for them, and identifying them to UK immigration officials. He was dismissed for gross misconduct. The respondent did not participate in proceedings, asserting state immunity.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim on grounds of state immunity. While the dismissal itself was a private act, the tribunal found that the claimant's employment was an act of sovereign authority because his duties greeting Royal Family members and interfacing with UK immigration officials on their behalf constituted or were sufficiently close to the core diplomatic functions of representing the sending State and protecting its nationals under Article 3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Practical note

Embassy staff whose roles involve direct interface with host state officials on behalf of their sending state's nationals may be found to be engaged in sovereign acts, triggering state immunity even for UK national employees performing apparently administrative functions.

Legal authorities cited

Benkharbouche v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2017] ICR 1327Governor of Pitcairn and Associated Islands v Sutton (1994) 104 ILR 508Cudak v Lithuania (2010) 51 EHRR 15Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia v Al Hayali [2023] EAT 149

Statutes

State Immunity Act 1978 s.16State Immunity Act 1978 s.4State Immunity Act 1978 s.1Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations Article 3Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964State Immunity Act 1978 (Remedial) Order 2023

Case details

Case number
2200107/2023
Decision date
16 July 2024
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Name
Qatar Embassy
Sector
public sector
Represented
No

Employment details

Role
Protocol Officer / Coordinator of Public Relations
Service
9 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →