Sovereign Immunity

An ambassador's certificate which confirmed that certain

London bank accounts of Chad were not used for commercial purposes

failed to impress the Commercial Court.

In Orascom Telecom v Chad [2008] EWHC 1841, the court

decided that the ambassador's certificate was of no persuasive

power, not just because it lacked explanation, but also because it

was manifestly incorrect.

The accounts were established as part of an agreement with the

World Bank and others for the construction of an oil pipeline. The

majority of the accounts were for the purpose of repaying

Chad's debts to the World Bank and others, but the claimant

argued that at least one account, which it had targeted for a third

party debt order, was "property in use or intended to be used

for commercial purposes", and therefore fell within the

exception contained in the State Immunity Act 1978.

The court agreed and further raised the possibility that in

consenting to an ICC arbitration Chad had waived any immunity in

respect of enforcement.

The...