To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
On October 18, 2017, the U.K. Supreme Court ruled in Reyes v. Al-Malki and another that the Employment Tribunal in the United Kingdom had jurisdiction to hear claims of Ms. Reyes, a Filipino domestic servant, against her employer Mr. Al-Maliki, a member of the diplomatic staff of the Saudi Arabian embassy in London, under the exception to diplomatic immunity contained in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Reyes had brought a claim arguing that she was the victim of trafficking and a Court of Appeal had determined that the Employment Tribunal lacked jurisdiction due to Al-Maliki’s diplomatic immunity. As stated in the press release, the Court highlighted the Convention’s “fundamental distinction between the acts of a diplomat which are performed in the exercise of an ‘official function’ and those which are not.” The Court stated that after diplomats’ posts end and they have left the receiving state, they are usually entitled to “residual immunity,” which only applies to acts performed the exercise of “official functions.” Because Al-Maliki had left the United Kingdom, he was only entitled to residual immunity, and since Reyes’ work was not an act done in the exercise of diplomatic functions, nor was it done on behalf of Saudi Arabia, Al-Maliki could not rely on residual immunity. The Court therefore allowed Reyes’ appeal to move forward.