Summary
The claimant, Mr Grovit, was a business development manager. Mr Grovit lived and worked in the UK. His company made a request to the Dutch Central Bank for entry in a register. The application was refused because the trustworthiness of the directors was no longer beyond doubt.
The claimants issued a claim in England for libel against a number of defendants. The tortious claims were based on Article 5(3) of Brussels I. The jurisdiction of the English court was challenged by the defendants. The jurisdictional challenge was upheld by the English court. It was held that this action was not a civil matter within the meaning of the Regulation, and the issues raised did relate to the exercise of a sovereign authority. Mr Justice Tugendhat held that:
“60 The objectives of the Regulation, as set out in the Recitals, give no support to the view that it was intended to enable claimants to implead natural or legal persons in proceedings relating to anything done by them in the exercise of the sovereign authority of foreign state. And the general principles of law include the principle of state immunity in public international law. In the light of those considerations, and the guidance in para.[20] of Sonntag , I have no hesitation in holding that this action, brought on this Intended Decision Letter (which was written against the public law background set out above) is not a civil matter within the meaning of the Regulation.” [60]
On 14th July 2007, the High Court judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.