Employment Appeal Tribunal Grants Extension in Significant State Immunity Case
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has allowed an appeal against a Registrar's order, extending time for a significant state immunity case to proceed.
• public
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled to allow an extension of time for the Government of the State of Kuwait to pursue two appeals regarding state immunity. The decision, handed down by the President of the EAT, Lord Fairley, highlights the exceptional nature of cases involving the State Immunity Act 1978.
Background to the Dispute
The case involves complex legal arguments regarding the scope of section 5 of the State Immunity Act. The primary issues concern whether the personal injury exception applies to embassy employees and whether this extends to claims for psychiatric injury. The proposed appeals relate to a 2021 preliminary hearing judgment and a subsequent 2023 liability judgment.
The EAT's Reasoning
The appellant had been significantly out of time, with one appeal delayed by 1,042 days and another by 376 days. Despite this, the Tribunal found that the overriding duty of the court is to ensure that the principle of state immunity is correctly applied. Lord Fairley referenced the precedent set in United Arab Emirates v. Abdelghafar, which established that courts have a positive duty to give effect to immunity even if the state does not appear.
The Tribunal also noted that there are currently several related cases pending before the higher courts, including the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. These decisions are expected to provide essential clarity on the interpretation of the law. Consequently, the EAT decided that the interests of justice, combined with the need to correctly apply statutory immunity, justified the extension of time.
Moving Forward
While the parties were eager to progress, the Tribunal acknowledged the current backlog within the EAT. It has been agreed that the appeals will proceed to a full hearing on the basis that they raise arguable points of law. Both parties retain the liberty to apply for an expedited hearing once further clarity from other pending cases becomes available.
Read the entire judgment here: The Government of the State of Kuwait v Fenniche [2026] EAT 83
