Sovereign immunity — Foreign State — Restrictive theory of sovereign immunity — Onus of establishing the claim to immunity — Whether on the foreign State — State obtaining services of architect for the construction of State’s national pavilion at exhibition — Whether a public sovereign act of the foreign State — Mode of determination of the question — Whether foreign State entitled to immunity — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Foreign State — Whether immunity absolute — Onus of establishing the claim to immunity — Whether on the foreign State — Whether immunity available in commercial transactions — Whether immunity available in an action in revendication — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Foreign State — Restrictive theory of sovereign immunity — State obtaining services of architect for the construction of foreign State’s national pavilion at exhibition — Whether a public or a commercial act — Whether State entitled to sovereign immunity in action by architect for his fees — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Agency of a foreign State — Whether entitled to immunity — Exceptions to the rule of sovereign immunity — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Foreign State — Restrictive theory of immunity — Whether immunity available in commercial transactions — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Diplomatic immunity — Foreign State — Lease of land for use as embassy premises — Landlord claiming under covenants in lease — Whether action should be dismissed at preliminary stage on grounds of immunity — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Agency of foreign State — Circumstances in which agency entitled to plead sovereign immunity — Identification of agency with foreign State — Whether an organ or alter ego of foreign State — Significance of agency’s status under laws of foreign State — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Foreign State — Immunity from execution — Default judgment against foreign State — Whether capable of being enforced by attachment of funds held at bank in State’s name — Restrictive theory of sovereign immunity — The law of Canada

Sovereign immunity — Principles — Principle that English courts will not indirectly implead a foreign sovereign — Status of the Ruler of Ras al Khaima — Action involving property belonging to the Ruler — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Absolute theory — Whether may exceptions recognized by English law — Commercial transaction — Whether sovereign immunity applicable — Transaction unconnected with England — Capacity of the English courts to develop exceptions to the general principle of sovereign immunity — Foreign States — Government department succeeding to rights and duties of government-owned corporation — Whether entitled to sovereign immunity — International law in general — Relation to municipal law — Incorporation and transformation doctrines — Doctrine of binding precedent — Whether English courts bound by earlier decisions relating to international law — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Absolute and restrictive theories — Public vessels — Ship in use for purely commercial purposes — Owned by government but operated by private company — Application of the restrictive theory of immunity to actions in rem — The law of England and Hong Kong

Sovereign immunity — Restrictive theory — Whether part of modern International law — Whether applicable in English courts — Distinction between acta iure imperii and iure gestionis — Whether based upon nature or purpose of transaction — Agencies of foreign State — Central Bank — Whether entitled to sovereign immunity

International law in general — Relation to municipal law — Customary international law — Whether part of the law of England — Whether English courts entitled to give effect to changes in the rules of international law — Doctrines of transformation and incorporation — Doctrine of binding precedent — Applicability when English courts consider international law — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Public vessels — Absolute and restrictive theories of sovereign immunity — Whether restrictive theory applicable in English law — Extent of restrictive theory — Whether a State immune in respect of sovereign act arising in commercial context — Claim of interest in property by State — Whether State required to prove interest or merely show claim not illusory — Admiralty jurisdiction — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Foreign State-owned corporation — State trading organization — Whether an organ or department of the foreign State — Whether entitled to plead sovereign immunity — Decree of foreign government prohibiting State trading organization from complying with contract — Whether trading organization entitled to rely on force majeure clause — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Absolute and restrictive theories — Which theory applicable to actions in personam in England — Extent of restrictive theory — Whether permitting inquiry into meaning and effect of foreign State’s legislation in case to which that State is a party — Act of State doctrine

International law in general — Relation to municipal law — Whether customary international law part of the law of England — Whether doctrine of binding precedent applicable to decisions on international law — Irreconcilable decisions of Court of Appeal — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Immunity from attachment — Property of central bank — Whether Central Bank of Nigeria entitled to immunity from suit or attachment — Mareva injunction — Whether available to restrain central bank from removing funds from the jurisdiction — United Kingdom State Immunity Act 1978 — Whether retroactive — Whether combined effect of United Kingdom legislation and United States Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 has changed international law

International law in general — Sources — State practice — Legislation — Effect of legislation by United Kingdom and United States on content of customary international law — Relationship of international law and municipal law — Duty of court to apply current rules of international law — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Public vessels — Restrictive theory — Distinction between acta iure imperii and acta iure gestionis — Whether depending upon nature or purpose of act — Whether political decision to break commercial contract or convert goods in commercial context attracts immunity

International law in general — Sources — Relation to municipal law — Legislation and treaty on sovereign immunity — Effect on customary international law — The law of England

Foreign sovereign — Act of foreign State — Principle of English law — Relationship to U.S. doctrine — Nature and extent of principle in English law — No application to extra-territorial acts of foreign sovereign — Legislation of foreign State — Laws of penal and discriminatory character — Recognition by English courts

Contract — Sale of sugar — Seller a company created by Cuban Government with responsibility for all external trade transactions relating to sugar and for ensuring compliance with International Sugar Agreement — Seller not a department of Cuban State and enjoying independent legal personality — Buyer a private company majority of shares in which held by Chilean State trading organisation — Effect of coup d’état in Chile — Withdrawal of vessel discharging — Diversion of vessel on high seas — Suspension of shipments — Frustration — Effect of Cuban legislation freezing Chilean assets — Effect of directive ordering suspension of contract shipments to Chile — Ability of Cuban company to rely on plea of frustration where frustrating event is act of Cuban Government — Coup d’état as frustrating event — The law of England

Sovereign immunity — Restrictive theory — Building works at ambassador’s residence — Whether a commercial transaction — Whether restrictive theory of sovereign immunity a part of English law prior to the State Immunity Act 1978 — Whether restrictive theory limited to action in rem — Service of process — The law of England