Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T17:55:37.259Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thureau Dangin v. Paturau

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , April 1951 , pp. 384 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Concurring, Osman, J., said: “The English commentators are by no means clear asto the extent of the privileges accorded to consular officers, but they do not appear toextend to consuls the immunity from legal action, although there is no reported case wheresuch immunity has been refused to a consul in England for an act done in the exerciseof his functions. On the other hand, the French authors and Courts admit in unambiguousterms the exemption from local jurisdiction in respect of acts done by aconsul in the execution of his official duties.

“I have reached the conclusion that the principle of exemption from local jurisdictionenunciated by French commentators and applied by the French Courts is a sound principlewhich should find its application in this Colony as that principle is based on reciprocityand international courtesy. I hold this opinion independently of the advicetendered by the Foreign Office that the fact that defendant was appointed to act asconsul in 1944 entitled him to immunity from legal process in respect of any act committedby him in the exercise of his official functions.”