- State immunity from enforcement—what is ‘state property?’ (Boru Hatlari Ile Petrol Taşima AŞ v Tepe Insaat Sanayii AS)
- What are the practical implications of this judgment?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the Board) rejected an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal of Jersey, which had held that a party seeking to enforce an arbitration award was entitled to enforce that award against certain shares held in Jersey companies by the debtor. The Board rejected the appellant’s contention that the phrase ‘the property of the state’ was to be interpreted as including all property under the control of, or in the possession of, the state. That definition did not accord with the definition of property as accepted by domestic law. Written by Christopher Snell, barrister at New Square Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial