Private international law provides both personal and proprietary immunities to the persons having sovereign status. Proprietary immunity is being provided to the properties in hand / authority of such persons having sovereign status. their property cannot be detained or destroyed when an action is brought against such persons in a foreign country.

1. CONFLICT OF LAWS
PROPRIETARY IMMUNITY
OF THE SOVEREIGN
BY :- ADV. CAROLINE ELIAS

2. PROPRIETARY IMMUNITY :
 Sovereign and sovereign states are provided with personal
immunity & proprietary immunity (especially under English
private international law).
 A foreign court will not take actions against them unless it is
willing to submit to the jurisdiction.
 The court will not, whether the sovereign is a party to the
proceedings or not, by its process seize or detain a property which
belongs to the sovereign or is in control of the sovereign.
 Three instances of proprietary immunity are:-
(1) if the sovereign is the admitted owner
(2) if the sovereign has de facto possession / control through
servants
(3) If the sovereign has an immediate right to possession.

3. (1) Where the sovereign is the admitted owner of the subject
matter of the suit :-
 In The Parliament Belge case :
A ship belonging to the Belgian Govt. collided with a British ship
in Dover Harbour. The Belgian ship carried not only public mail
but also merchandise and passengers for hire. An action brought
against the Belgian ship for negligence was stayed on the ground
that the ship was the property of a sovereign government and this
was confirmed by the Court of Appeal.
Another important point decide in this case, was that the
jurisdictional immunity enjoyed by the Foreign Government was
not lost because the vessel was engaged on trading operations.

4. (2) Where the sovereign though not the owner, is in de facto
possession or control of the subject matter through its
servants :-
 In The Christina Case : (1938, I All E.R.729)
The Republican Govt. of Spain issued a decree requisitioning (to
officially request or take something) all private ships registered in
Spain.
The Christina, a private ship registered in Spain was in the
British Port of Cardiff at the time of the decree. Spanish consul
boarded the ship and dismissed all the crew members who were
not sympathetic to the Republican Govt. of Spain and appointed a
new captain and a new crew on behalf on the new Govt.
The owners sought a writ to detain and get possession of the ship
by the sovereign through its agent and held that the action would
not lie.

5. (3) Where the sovereign not in possession, has an immediate
right to possession :-
 In U.S.A. v. Bank of England (1952 I All.E.R. 572)
During the II World War, the Germans seized some gold bars
belonging to a company and carried them off to Germany. This was
recovered by the Allies and deposited in the Bank of England to be
shared among U.K., France and U.S.A. After war, the company
claimed the gold bars from the Bank of England.
It was held that the Bank was only a bailee and the sovereign
govts. Were entitled to immediate possession of the gold bars.
Hence the protective umbrella of sovereign immunity was available
and the action would not lie.
 In Rahimtoola v. Nizam of Hyderabad also House of Lords
decided in a similar way, that the principle of proprietary immunity
is equally applicable where the subject matter of the suit is chose in
action like a bank deposit or money due etc.