State immunity — State agency — Commercial activity — Claim for breach of contract against Mexican State agency — Attempt to establish quasi in rem jurisdiction over third party because of lack of personal jurisdiction — Whether foreign State immune from garnishee order being used to establish quasi in rem jurisdiction — Whether United States courts having subject-matter jurisdiction where commercial activities in United States unrelated to suit against foreign State agency — The law of the United States

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Onus of establishing applicability of exception to State immunity — Action for damages against foreign State and its instrumentality — Whether caveat lodged as part of divorce proceedings preventing repatriation of funds constitutes unlawful taking without compensation and contrary to international law — The law of the United States

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Foreign State — Exceptions to immunity — Duty of court to consider subject — matter jurisdiction before turning to act of State doctrine — Expropriation of Argentine corporation in Argentina — Whether promotional and other activities performed in United States in relation to hotel owned by corporation sufficient to meet requirements of commercial activity exception — Whether interference with rights of shareholders resident in United States sufficient to constitute “direct effect” for commercial activity exception — International takings exception to immunity — Criteria for a taking in violation of international law — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Foreign State — Exceptions to immunity — Official torture — United States residents seeking to claim for torture committed in Argentina — Whether prohibition of official torture a rule of jus cogens — Whether violation of jus cogens divests State of its immunity — International treaty exception — Requirement that document relied on is a treaty and conflicts directly with domestic provisions — Implicit waiver exception — Whether involvement by foreign State of United States courts in acts forming part of activities complained of constitutes implicit waiver of immunity — Requirement of direct nexus between foreign State’s activities in United States courts and claim brought against the foreign State in the United States — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Jus cogens — Whether a violation of jus cogens ousts immunity of a foreign State from jurisdiction of municipal courts in absence of specific legislative provision — Claim in United States courts against Argentina — Alleged torture committed by Argentine officials — Whether prohibition on official torture a rule of jus cogens — Whether absence of provision in Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 establishing exception to immunity in case of violation of jus cogens precludes United States courts from exercising jurisdiction — The law of the United States

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Commercial activity exception — Action for breach of contract against foreign State entity — Requirement of connection between commercial activity of foreign State entity and United States — Requirement that cause of action be based on that commercial activity — Commercial activity of foreign entity relied upon by plaintiff relating to original contract between parties — Action based upon later agreement between parties — Whether commercial activity relating to earlier agreement sufficient to establish exception to immunity in suit based on later agreement — The law of the United States

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Commercial activity — Implied waiver of immunity — Writ of garnishment on assets of foreign State entity to satisfy judgment debt in action arising from an agreement to which State entity was not a party — Agreement with petroleum workers trade union — Writ of garnishment on assets of national oil company — Whether trades union could be regarded as agent of national oil company — Whether provision in statute creating foreign State entity permitting it “to sue and be sued” constitutes a waiver of immunity — The law of the United States

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Conduct of foreign relations — Act of State — Whether applicable to claim for breach of contract — Whether claim calling into question validity of acts of a foreign government

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Commercial activity exception — Action for damages for breach of contract against a State entity — Whether Government can be held liable for acts of State entity — Agency relationship — Distinction between State entity and alter ego of the Government — Philippines Presidential Commission on Good Government — Contract for sale of aircraft — Failure by State entity to fulfil contractual obligation to defend purchaser of aircraft in event of challenge to validity of title to aircraft — The law of the United States

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Instrumentality of State — Whether acts performed outside scope of official duties attract immunity as acts of instrumentality of State — Acts in violation of international law — Claim by alien for wrongful death resulting from torture by military police — Whether United States courts have jurisdiction over acts performed wholly outside United States by a State against its own nationals — United States Alien Tort Statute — The law of the United States

State immunity — State agency — Commercial activity — Implied waiver of immunity — Claim for breach of contract and repayment of debt against foreign State and State agency — Application for security for costs — State entity established by decree to manage assets on insolvency of business based in that State — State entity participating in litigation relating to insolvency in United States courts without raising defence of State immunity — Whether an implied waiver — Whether liquidation and management of assets a commercial activity — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — Whether act of State doctrine applicable — The law of the United States

State immunity — Head of State — Whether waiver issued by new Government of any and all immunities enjoyed by former Head of State effective — Action for damages for torture and other treatment infringed in Haiti — Whether United States Alien Tort Statute provides right of action as well as jurisdictional base — Whether act of State and political question doctrines render matter non-justiciable — The law of the United States

State immunity — Instrumentality or agency of State — Enforcement of arbitral award against instrumentality of State — Whether ICC arbitration award and decision of a French court upholding validity of award enforceable in the United States against a State instrumentality — Whether immunity impliedly waived by agreement in contract to arbitrate in accordance with ICC rules and where State is signatory to Convention on Enforcement and Recognition of Foreign Arbitral Awards — The law of the United States

State immunity — State entity — Enforcement by third party of arbitration clause in contract — Whether State-owned corporation in early stages of privatisation entitled to immunity — Whether immunity implicitly waived by conclusion of contract containing arbitration clause — Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards — United States Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — The law of the United States

State immunity — Head of State’s immunity — Whether applicable to Head of State when not de facto ruler of State — Claim for compensation for judicial killing against exiled ruler recognized as lawful Head of State by United States Executive — Suggestion of immunity letter issued by Executive — Whether court compelled to defer to determination by Executive — Whether implied waiver of immunity effective — Whether United States Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 or Torture Victim Protection Act 1992 can negate immunity — The law of the United States

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Jus cogens — Crimes against humanity — Action for damages against Federal Republic of Germany by victim of Holocaust — Whether violation of jus cogens precludes State from relying on sovereign immunity — Whether constitutes implicit waiver of immunity

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Action for damages against Federal Republic of Germany by victim of Holocaust — Plaintiff a United States citizen at time of Holocaust — Whether State immunity applicable — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act 1976 — Whether having retroactive effect — Commercial activity exception — Requirement of direct effect — Waiver of immunity — Whether violation of jus cogens constitutes implicit waiver — International agreement exception to immunity — Whether international agreement vests individual with private right of action

War and armed conflict — Implementation of the laws of war — Compensation for violations of laws of war — Action by victim of violation against belligerent State in national courts of rival belligerent after conclusion of war — Whether barred by sovereign immunity — Hague Convention No. IV, 1907, Article 3 — Hague Regulations on Land Warfare, 1907, Article 52 — Second World War — Employment of slave labour — The law of the United States

Human rights — State responsibility — Whether alleged violations capable of falling within the jurisdiction of respondent Government even when occurring outside its national territory — Meaning of jurisdiction under Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights — Responsibility arising from effective control over an area as a consequence of lawful or unlawful military action — Northern Cyprus

Recognition — Government — Effect of recognition of government by international community — Granting of locus standi as government of a High Contracting Party to the European Convention on Human Rights

Treaties — Interpretation — Validity of territorial restrictions attached to declarations accepting competence of Commission and Court — Special character of European Convention on Human Rights — Interpretation in light of present-day conditions and so as to make safeguards effective — Ordinary meaning of optional clauses in their context and in light of their object and purpose — Expressly permitted restrictions — Subsequent practice of Contracting Parties — Fundamental differences in the roles and purposes of the International Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights

Treaties — Interpretation — Validity of remaining parts of declarations accepting competence of Commission and Court — Severability of invalid restrictions — Relevance of government’s statements subsequent to filing of declarations — Government’s awareness of consistent State practice