CYIL 2014

KLARA POLACKOVA VAN DER PLOEG CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ the international law concept. This inexperience has resulted in a deviation from the international terminology and somewhat confusing treatment of the matter. Nevertheless, the renewed emphasis on the idea that a foreign State should enjoy immunity precisely because it carries out certain public functions could arguably constitute the very contribution of Czech courts to the development of the contemporary doctrine of State immunity. As case law on State immunity has to date been relatively infrequent in the Czech Republic, the current judicial approach to immunities of foreign States remains rather unrefined. The Czech courts will need to further develop their position in future cases and more complicated scenarios in order to reach the level of sophistication existing in other jurisdictions. For example, on its plain reading, it would seem that Czech courts could be prepared to deny State immunity in employment and tort cases far in excess of the current international standard. More accurately, however, the decisions need to be read against the background of the specific facts of each case (an exercise self-evident in common law jurisdictions, but much less obvious in some civil law countries), and further elaboration of the currently broadly worded principle is to be expected. Additionally, it will be interesting to observe how the courts will resolve any future in casu conflict between State immunity and human rights, considering the specifics of the Czech constitutional order and its built-in normative hierarchy.

450