Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:36:28.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Note on Indian State Practice with Respect to the Immunity of Indian Property Located within the Jurisdiction of Foreign States*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

S.K. Agrawala
Get access

Extract

There are very few cases in which India has been a party to litigation before foreign courts on the question of sovereign immunity.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands Yearbook of International Law , Volume 10 , December 1979 , pp. 125 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1979

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. Second Session, Cairo (1–13 October 1958), issued by the Secretariat of the Committee, New Delhi.

2. AD 1941–42, Case No. 10, vol. 10 p. 38.

3. 28 ILR (1963) p. 150.

4. 446 F.2d.1198, US Court of Appeal 2nd circuit, 27 July 1971. Certiori denied, 7 December 1971, 404 US 985 (cited from 1972 AJIL p. 396).

5. Under the Constitution of India contracts with the Union of India are required to be entered into in the name of the President of India (Art. 299).

6. 324 US 30 (1945).

7. For comments on the judgment, see Brower, C.N., “Litigation of Soveriegn Immunity before a State Administrative Body and the Department of State: The Japanese Uranium Tax Case,” 71 AJIL (1977) at pp. 450–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also 13 Harvard International Law Journal (1972) pp. 527, 533.Google Scholar

8. See n. 1 supra at p. 48.of the Report.

9. See n. 1 supra at p. 49 of the Report.

10. Ibid. p. 34.