Afghan Minister (Consular Activities) Case

Date13 Octubre 1932
Docket NumberCase No. 179
CourtCourt of Appeal of Berlin (Germany)
Germany, Court of Appeal of Berlin.
Case No. 179
Afghan Minister (Consular Activities) Case.
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR INTERCOURSE AND PRIVILEGES

Diplomatic Immunities — Combination of Diplomatic and Consular Functions — Limits of Extraterritoriality — Voluntary Submission to Jurisdiction — Whether Involving Submission to Execution.

International Law — Relation to Municipal Law — Article 4 of the German Constitution.

Consular Privileges and Immunities — Combination of Diplomatic and Consular Functions.

The Facts.—The Afghan Minister in Berlin had brought two actions against the appellant. Both actions, which arose out of the Minister's consular activities, were dismissed with costs. An order was made fixing the amount of costs, and the appellant thereupon applied for a compulsory mortgage to be registered on the Minister's property in Germany. The District Court refused the application. On appeal,

Held: that the appeal must be dismissed. The Court said: “Section 18 (1) of the Judicature Act provides that the jurisdiction of German Courts does not extend to the heads of embassies and legations accredited to Germany. This provision reproduces a principle generally recognised by international law. Such a principle must, as is now expressly laid down in Article 4 of the Constitution, be applied by German Courts even if not expressed in a municipal statute. The principle means that the head of the embassy or legation, as the case may be, shall be extraterritorial in the receiving State, i.e. that he shall be exempt from that State's jurisdiction. … (See Entscheidungen des Reichsgerichts in Zivilsachen, vol. 111, p. 150.) This applies to criminal and civil jurisdiction, to the trial itself, and to the execution of judgments. Where the head of a foreign mission is so exempt he enjoys the immunity absolutely and to its full extent. His personality under international law cannot be split up so that he may be treated as extraterritorial in his capacity as diplomatic representative, but not generally as a private person. For this reason it is...

Um weiterzulesen

FORDERN SIE IHR PROBEABO AN

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT