THE LAW GOVERNING UNITED KINGDOM GOVERNMENT TORT LIABILITY IN THE ‘WAR ON TERROR’

Abstract This article discusses the United Kingdom Supreme Court judgment in Zubaydah v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office , which addressed the law governing the tort liability of the United Kingdom Government for its alleged complicity in the claimant's arbitrary detention and torture overseas by the Central Intelligence Agency. In holding that English law applied, the Court departed from previous case law by giving decisive weight to public law factors in its choice-of-law reasoning. This decision arguably heralds a greater role for English law in relation to tort claims brought by overseas victims of allegedly wrongful exercises of British executive authority as a mechanism for achieving executive accountability, controlling abuse of power, ensuring the rule of law and providing victims access to remedy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International and Comparative Law Quarterly
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020589324000344
Citations
1
Primary Topic
International Law and Human Rights
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.23
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

THE LAW GOVERNING UNITED KINGDOM GOVERNMENT TORT LIABILITY IN THE ‘WAR ON TERROR’

Uglješa Grušić
1 citations
International and Comparative Law Quarterly
International Law and Human Rights
2.23
article

THE LAW GOVERNING UNITED KINGDOM GOVERNMENT TORT LIABILITY IN THE ‘WAR ON TERROR’

Uglješa Grušić
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article discusses the United Kingdom Supreme Court judgment in Zubaydah v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office , which addressed the law governing the tort liability of the United Kingdom Government for its alleged complicity in the claimant's arbitrary detention and torture overseas by the Central Intelligence Agency. In holding that English law applied, the Court departed from previous case law by giving decisive weight to public law factors in its choice-of-law reasoning. This decision arguably heralds a greater role for English law in relation to tort claims brought by overseas victims of allegedly wrongful exercises of British executive authority as a mechanism for achieving executive accountability, controlling abuse of power, ensuring the rule of law and providing victims access to remedy.

International and Comparative Law QuarterlyVol. 73(4)
Faculty (United Kingdom) (GB), University College London (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
International Law and Human Rights
2.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.