Canada: The First Gulf War's Last Battle: Limits Of State Sovereignty

Last Updated: November 26 2011
Article by Manjit Singh

Kuwait Airways Corp. v. Iraq, 2010 SCC 40

The Supreme Court of Canada recently released a very important, and no less interesting, unanimous decision dealing with the convergence of public and private international law, with particular regard to Canadian recognition of foreign judgments against foreign states.


On August 2nd, 1990, under orders from then dictator Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi armed forces crossed the country's southern most border, invaded and occupied its neighbour, Kuwait. Iraq had long claimed Kuwait was properly the eastern portion of its Basra province, a territory that had been improperly ceded by the British after the commencement of the First World War, in violation of a convention between the United Kingdom and the Ottoman Empire, until then the recognized sovereignty over the autonomous city of Kuwait and surrounding areas.1

Yet, it was not historical claims of territorial sovereignty which prompted Saddam to violate Kuwaiti independence – rather, it was the massive Iraqi debt, stemming from the horrific Iraq-Iran War (1980-1988), owed to Kuwait that the latter refused to forgive that raised the former dictator's ire. Saddam's plan was as simple as it was evil: incorporate Kuwait into Iraq, thereby not only eliminating the debt, but adding Kuwaiti assets, including billions worth in oil reserves, to his treasury (not even to mention that he would become the most powerful Arab leader in the region).2 Clearly, then, Saddam had planned the mother of all hostile takeovers!

The Facts

Of course, Saddam's gambit failed miserably, and approximately six months after the occupation of Kuwait, a United Nations coalition of armed forces, manned primarily by the United States and Britain, liberated Kuwait and defeated the Iraqi army in the First Gulf War. Nonetheless, during the six months of occupation, Kuwait suffered incredible damages as the country was simply looted by the Iraqi forces, under control of the Iraqi government.3

As part of Saddam's scheme of incorporating Kuwait into Iraq, the Iraqi government directed the Iraqi Airways Company (Iraq's national airline) to appropriate the aircraft and equipment of the Kuwait Airways Corporation (Kuwait's national airline). Kuwait Airways Corporation was only able to mitigate a portion of its damages by recovering some its aircraft and equipment after the war. For the yet uncompensated damages, Kuwait Airways Corporation brought an action for damages against the Iraqi Airways Company in the United Kingdom.

English Judgments

Kuwait Airways Corporation's action for damages for losses sustained as a result of the appropriation of its property by the Iraq Airways Company during the occupation was allowed to be heard by the United Kingdom courts. The proceedings were both lengthy and costly, but, in the end, the British court rendered a judgment equivalent to CAN$1 billion dollars in favour of Kuwait Airways Corporation, rejecting the argument of Iraqi Airways Company that its actions during the occupation, under direction of the government, afforded it state immunity. The UK court found that, pursuant to the legislation of the United Kingdom, the actions of Iraqi Airways Company were not within the exception of state immunity thus afforded.

Nonetheless, it was not this judgment that would ultimately bring this action to the Supreme Court of Canada. Pursuant to the English rules of civil procedure, Kuwait Airways Corporation requested leave to have the sovereign state of Iraq ("Republic of Iraq") joined as a second defendant in order to claim costs for the action it had successfully brought against Iraqi Airways Company. In July 2008, the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court granted the application, and Ordered the defendants, including the sovereign state of Iraq, to pay the equivalent of CAN$84 million in costs to Kuwait Airways Corporation.

Although the application was not opposed, the Honourable Justice Steel did consider whether Iraq, as a sovereign state, ought to be entitled immunity pursuant to the State Immunity Act 1978 (U.K.), 1978, c. 33. The Honourable Justice Steel found that, on the basis of the commercial exception of that Act, Iraq was not entitled to immunity. The finding held that the Iraqi government's controlling, funding and supervision of the Iraqi Airways Company's defence throughout the legal proceedings was not a sovereign act, but rather fell within the commercial activity exception to the principle of state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978.

Canadian Judicial History

One month later, Kuwait Airways Corporation applied for recognition of the Honourable Justice Steel's judgment in Quebec Superior Court.

Having some of its assets in Quebec seized by way of seizure before judgment, the Iraq government challenged the Canadian proceedings by filing a motion raising a declinatory exception pursuant to the State Immunity Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-18. In said motion, Iraq requested that Kuwait Airways Corporation's application for recognition of the English judgment be dismissed as the impugned acts of Iraq were sovereign acts under international law, and that, thus, Iraq was entitled to state immunity pursuant to Canadian Law.

The Honourable Justice Chaput, of the Quebec Superior Court, sided with Iraq and dismissed the application for recognition of the English judgment against the country, finding that pursuant to the State Immunity Act, foreign states are entitled to immunity in Canadian courts for their sovereign acts, even if those acts were wrongful. Further, the Honourable Justice Chaput found that the impugned acts, of Iraq controlling, funding and supervising the defence of Iraqi Airways Company in the UK action did not amount to "commercial activity" for which an exception ought to be granted.

At the next level, the Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed Kuwait Airways Company's appeal, echoing the findings of the lower court. The Quebec Court of Appeal determined that the nature of state immunity and the conditions for applying it are to be determined by Canadian law. Therefore, it decided that Iraq's impugned acts were sovereign acts and did not view Iraq's controlling, funding and supervising of Iraqi Airways Company's defence a "commercial activity" exception to state immunity, pursuant to Canada's State Immunity Act.

Supreme Court of Canada

Naturally, Kuwait Airways Company appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

On October 21, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, unanimously setting aside the decisions of the two lower courts, dismissing the respondent's exception to dismiss the application for recognition of the foreign judgment against it, and granting costs throughout to the appellant.

The SCC held that, pursuant to s.3 of the State Immunity Act, Iraq, as a sovereign state, maintains a presumption of immunity from jurisdiction in legal proceedings against it, but that such a presumption is rebuttable, the onus being on the party rebutting. Further, the SCC found that, pursuant to the principles of Conflict of Laws, the issue must be decided under Canadian law, despite the fact that an English court had already rendered its own decision on the issue since that decision is not res judicata in Canada, because the jurisdiction of the Quebec courts would otherwise be delimited by the UK courts and British law.

Nonetheless, the SCC held that the Quebec court cannot review the merits of the foreign decision (art. 3158 C.C.Q.; Canada Post Corp. v. Lépine, 2009 SCC 16, [2009] 1 S.C.R. 549, at para. 23). Rather, in considering an application for enforcement of a foreign judgment, the court ought to determine the issues considered within the framework of the law currently applicable in Canada, including public international law, but on the basis of the foreign court's finding of facts.

Therefore, the SCC held that in determining whether or not a state's impugned acts fall within the commercial activity exception to state immunity, the court ought to apply a contextual approach, including analyzing not only the nature of the act(s) in question, but the purpose as well.

In the case at bar, the SCC held that as the lower courts are not to review the merits of the case vis-à-vis the application of enforcement of a foreign judgment, the court must accept the findings of fact made by the foreign court. The UK court had held that although the original appropriation of the aircraft was a sovereign act, the subsequent retention and use of the aircraft by Iraqi Airways Company were commercial acts. Further, in rendering a judgment of costs against the state of Iraq, the UK court had also found that the there was no connection between the commercial litigation in which Iraq had "controlled, funded and supervised" the defence of Iraqi Airways Company and the initial sovereign act of seizing the aircraft.

Consequently, based on the findings of fact of the UK court, Iraq cannot rely on the state immunity provided for in s.3 of the State Immunity Act, as the impugned acts fall within the "commercial activity" exception therein, pursuant to s. 5 of said Act.

As a result of the SCC's ruling, Iraq's motion to dismiss the application for recognition of the foreign judgment is hereby dismissed, allowing Kuwait Airways Corporation's original application for recognition (and execution) of the foreign judgment to proceed.


This important SCC ruling further expands the doctrine of limited state immunity. In particular, this continuing evolution in public international law, furthering a restrictive theory of state immunity, has expanded the "commercial activity" exception thereto by examining a sovereign state's impugned acts within a contextual analysis of not only the nature of said acts, but their purpose as well.

Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice Lebel found that "the [State Immunity Act] represents a clear rejection of the view that the immunity of foreign states is absolute...there are now exceptions to the principle of state immunity."

Sovereign states, then, must tread carefully, as the rights of non-state parties to bring actions against the state for damages resulting from a non-exhaustive, contextual interpretation of "commercial activity" continues to expand and evolve. Conversely, it would be prudent for non-state parties to consider not shying away from litigating against states and state entities as the protections previously provided for by the doctrine of state immunity are eroding, particularly in areas of commercial activity, which is broadly defined in s. 2 of the State Immunity Act.

It appears that at the confluence of public and private international law, sovereign states may very well forfeit their immunity should they take actions to participate, or interfere, in activity governed by private international law, including, as we have seen here, legal proceedings.

Looking forward, it will indeed be very interesting to witness the application of these expansive principles of limited state immunity in different contexts. It is not too difficult to see a time in the not-too-distant future wherein states currently involved in conflicts around the world are named as defendants in actions for damages resulting from various broadly-defined commercial activities therein.

Will it really be too long before the United States is named as a co-Defendant in Canada in an action for damages brought against one of its seemingly limitless US government funded, controlled and supervised "contractors" in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or any of a host of other countries, whether publicly acknowledged as of yet or not?

And, when such a time does come, will Canadian courts apply the same principles as this SCC ruling to a friendly, some would argue "indispensible", foreign neighbour - in fact, our partner in some of those same wars?

Whatever the eventual answer, the convergence of public and private international law continues unabated.


1. In any event, the British did not allow an independent Kuwait until 1961, almost a half-century later.

2. And, may even have obtained an assurance of non-intervention from the American ambassador a week before the invasion, if Iraqi transcripts of the meeting are to be believed.

3. Pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolution 687, which declared Iraq financially liable for the damages caused by its invasion, the United Nations Compensation Commission reported US$350 billion in claims filed by governments, corporations and individuals against Iraq in the form of war reparations. Payments continue to date, and, as of July 2010, US$18.4 billion has already been distributed to claimants.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.