The judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Benkharbouche v Sudan and Janah v Libya provides many critical insights into the potential role of the EU Charter of fundamental rights in defining the limits of sovereign immunities. In a case involving foreign States immunity from civil jurisdiction in labor matters the Court of Appeal ruled that some provisions of the State Immunity Act had to be set aside to the extent that they were incompatible with Article 47 of the Charter. The suitability of Article 47 to produce horizontal direct effects if upheld by the Court of Justice of the European Union may have far-reaching implications on domestic procedural law. The judgment here under review represents a breakthrough for the protection of the right to effective judicial protection. However! it is questionable in the part where the Court assesses which civil claims are within the scope of EU law. A correct application of the Mahadmia jurisprudence should have led the Court to widen the scope of application of the Charter! by identifying a connection with EU law (under Article 51(1) of the Charter) through the Bruxelles I-bis regulation.

Immunità dello Stato estero dalla giurisdizione e diritto di accesso al giudice alla luce della Carta dei diritti fondamentali: riflessioni in margine al caso Benkharbouche e Janah.

VEZZANI, Simone
2015-01-01

Abstract

The judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Benkharbouche v Sudan and Janah v Libya provides many critical insights into the potential role of the EU Charter of fundamental rights in defining the limits of sovereign immunities. In a case involving foreign States immunity from civil jurisdiction in labor matters the Court of Appeal ruled that some provisions of the State Immunity Act had to be set aside to the extent that they were incompatible with Article 47 of the Charter. The suitability of Article 47 to produce horizontal direct effects if upheld by the Court of Justice of the European Union may have far-reaching implications on domestic procedural law. The judgment here under review represents a breakthrough for the protection of the right to effective judicial protection. However! it is questionable in the part where the Court assesses which civil claims are within the scope of EU law. A correct application of the Mahadmia jurisprudence should have led the Court to widen the scope of application of the Charter! by identifying a connection with EU law (under Article 51(1) of the Charter) through the Bruxelles I-bis regulation.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11391/1351317
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact