You are on page 1of 2


- General rule of IL within meaning of Art 25 Basic Law execution upon a bank account of a
foreign State w/in the country to cover an embassy’s expenses and costs was absolutely


- Generally recognized rule of IL

- German court had no JD over PH
- State could not be sued before the courts of another state without its agreement


- Execution was in principle admissible against a foreign state where immunity had been
restricted at the trial


- Execution by the forum State arising out of a judicial writ of enforcement against a foreign State
issued in relation to non-sovereign action (acta iure gestionis) of that State upon things of that
State located or occupied in the national territory of the forum State is inadmissible without
assent of the foreign State, insofar as these things at the time of commencement of the
enforcement measure serve sovereign purposes of the foreign State. Receivables from a current
ordinary bank account of the embassy of a foreign State existing in the forum State and
intended to cover expenses and costs of the embassy are not subject to execution by the forum
- This rule is part of federal law


1. According to present general IL, State is not bound to grant a foreign State exemption from
jurisdiction in a trial against that State to decide about its non-sovereign action
a. The range of States and of courts following the doctrine of functionally restricted
immunity, on which that case law is based, for trial proceedings has since grown larger
2. As regards execution, by contrast, many States continue to keep to the granting of in principle
unrestricted immunity to foreign States
a. For those States who grant in principle unrestricted immunity even in contentious
proceedings, this generally follows as a de facto outcome of this kind of immunity;
b. it bars the securing of a judicial title of execution, should the foreign State not subject
itself to jurisdiction.
c. But even many of those States that grant the foreign State exemption from their
jurisdiction in trial proceedings only for suits relating to sovereign action (acta iure
imperii), stick in principle to the ruling out of execution against the foreign State,
irrespective of whether the title to be enforced in the forum State concerns non-
sovereign action of the foreign State or whether the things upon which enforcement is
contemplated serve non-sovereign or exclusively commercial purposes, such as private
persons also pursue
3. In order to attest a general rule of international law within the meaning of Article 25 Basic Law,
the practice of many States in the sphere of execution mentioned would have to be an
established practice exercised by States generally in the conviction that they were obliged to do
so by international law
a. the focus should be primarily on the conduct of relevance in international law of those
State agencies that are in virtue of international law or of municipal law called upon to
represent the State in international legal transactions
b. may also be attested to in the acts of other organs of State like the legislature or the
courts, at least to the extent that their conduct is of direct relevance for international