COUNSEL: Mr. F. Gaban for the appellants.

Mr. W. T. Monckton for the respondent.

 

SOLICITORS: Messrs. Waltons and Co.; Messrs. Withers, Besons, Currie, Williams and Co.

 

JUDGES: Scrutton and Atkin, L.JJ.

 

DATE: (not stated)

 

SUBJECT: Diplomatic Privilege

 

 

Their Lordships dismissed this appeal by the plaintiffs, from a judgment of Mr. Justice McCardle, who had decided in favour of the defendant, Mr. Tom Smith, a clerk in the United States Embassy in London, on a question of diplomatic privilege.

 

The action was brought by the plaintiff company against the defendant for calls on shares. The defendant said that he was an American citizen domiciled in America, and had for the past two years and a half been chief of the Mail Department of the Embassy of the United States of America in London, and that that was his sole occupation, and that he occupied a permanent position on the personal staff of the Ambassador. He was appointed by the Ambassador personally and his appointment was confirmed by the Department of State in Washington. His principal duty was to forward all diplomatic communications between the American Ambassador and foreign countries. He was in a position of great confidential importance. All outgoing dispatches were handed to him and he had charge of the Embassy Seal and he sealed all documents issuing from the Embassy which had to be sealed. In effect, he controlled the formal clerical work of the Embassy. His name appeared in the list of the Embassy staff which was periodically submitted to the Foreign Office, and therefore he had been recognized as an official by the State Department of the United States. The Ambassador occupied a neutral position.

 

The defendant applied to the Master to set aside the writ on the ground that he was protected by diplomatic privilege. The Master granted the application and set aside the writ on that ground, and the matter came before Mr. Justice McCardle on appeal.

 

Mr. Justice McCardle affirmed the Master’s order on the ground that by the rules of international comity immunity from judicial process extended not only to the person of the Minister or Ambassador but to his family, suite, and servants, and that Mr. Smith, the defendant, stood in the same position as a private secretary or an amanuensis to the Ambassador. His Lordship held that the Master was right in deciding that Mr. Smith was protected against all processes in these Courts.

 

The plaintiffs appealed.

 

Mr. F. Gaban appeared for the appellants and Mr. W. T. Monckton for the respondent.

 

The Court dismissed the appeal without calling on the respondent’s counsel.

 

Lord Justice Scruton, in giving judgment, said that a person occupying the position which the defendant occupied—he was a person in a position of great confidential importance—came within the class of people who were privileged. He was on the official staff of the Embassy, carrying out official duties. The Court must observe the rules of international comity which gave diplomatic immunity from judicial process and must hold that the defendant was entitled to the immunity which he claimed. The appeal must be dismissed.

 

Lord Justice Atkin concurred.