- State immunity to claims by those working in UK military bases run by foreign states (Webster and Wright v USA)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What is the background?
- Relevant law
- Background facts
- Decision of the employment tribunal
- What did the EAT decide?
- Court details
Employment analysis: Two individuals, employed by the United States of America at two RAF bases in the UK, as a record manager in one case and a fire fighter in the other, both had roles in which the nature of the functions they were employed to perform constituted sovereign acts, and thus the foreign state employer was entitled to rely on state immunity against the tribunal claims they had brought, according to the EAT, applying the principles established by the Supreme Court in Benkharbouche, Janah v SoS for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
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 with LexisNexis or register for a free trial