Published on 3 November 2023 in Client Alerts
The Times article, entitled “Diplomats have immunity for a reason”, examines the recent split decision in the UK Supreme Court case of Basfar v Wong. The case has raised eyebrows in foreign ministries around the world. The prevailing view is that the decision has placed the UK in the unenviable position of being an outlier in its interpretation and application of State and diplomatic immunity. This in turn raises personal risks for UK diplomats overseas and threatens to hamper UK diplomatic activities.
It is a fundamental rule of international law that diplomats posted overseas are granted immunity from most of the host State’s domestic laws. This is a mutual, reciprocal obligation of States under international law. This immunity extends to the personal household of the diplomat within the host State. Such diplomatic immunities provide the vital stability that diplomatic missions need in order to function without interference from the host State (including the host State’s courts). Only through narrowly defined exceptions can diplomats be subject to litigation in a domestic court of a host State (one of which relates to personal commercial activity undertaken by a diplomat).
In Basfar, the UK Supreme Court considered a claim made in relation to the conditions of employment of a diplomat’s domestic staff. The staff had been brought to the UK as part of the diplomat’s personal household. The court decided that the alleged employment conditions of one member of the domestic staff — which were legal in the state of origin —transformed this otherwise immune diplomatic activity into not-immune commercial activity. This novel and highly creative approach taken by the Court does not reflect international law and practice.
The article considers the practical implications of Basfar within the wider context of international relations, as well as UK domestic litigation. The article predicts that foreign diplomats situated in London will now face increasing risk of litigation before the UK courts and a narrowing of the traditional scope of their immunity in ways that they would not in other countries. Given that State and diplomatic immunity are reciprocal, the Basfar judgment may well cause other States to reconsider the scope of protections that they will give to UK diplomats and diplomatic activities overseas.
The article is available to read in The Times.
For more information, contact robert.volterra@volterrafietta.com and jehad.mustafa@volterrafietta.com.
Volterra Fietta’s intensive hearing schedule for 2026 has continued apace. In July 2026, a team from the firm, led by Robert Volterra, Ahmed Abdel-Hakam and Florentine Vos, represented the Republic of Croatia at a hearing in the Addiko Bank AG and Addiko Bank d.d. v Republic of Croatia (ICSID Case No ARB/17/37).
Learn more
From 8 to 10 July 2026, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud met in Jeddah to discuss bilateral relations and regional developments. The visit yielded the signing of 13 new Memorandum of Understandings (MOUs) and commercial agreements across trade, investment, energy, mining and natural resources, technology, education, health, people-to-people ties, and defence.
Learn more
On 13 July 2026, the United Kingdom and the Swiss Confederation announced the conclusion of negotiations on an enhanced free trade agreement (“FTA”). This followed ten rounds of negotiations to modernise the two States’ bilateral framework which were launched in 2023. The Parties have indicated that they anticipate the final technical edits to be finalised
Learn more
On 17 July 2026, Volterra Fietta partner Robert G Volterra spoke at the Asia International Arbitration Centre London Roundtable on “Artificial Justice: Deciphering AI-Generated Fairness in Arbitration”. Robert discussed the growing use of AI in legal practice and dispute resolution, focusing on the limits of current AI tools and the risks associated with their use.
Learn more