You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Britain
UK court allows 3 men to seize Riyadh assets
2005-05-18
LONDON — The court of appeal in London on Monday granted lawyers acting for three men, who were tortured and detained in Saudi jails for more than two years, permission to seize the kingdom's assets in this country, including Saudi commercial airliners.
So the Brit courts have a spine. I like this.
The ruling follows a decision by the court of appeal last October giving the men the right to sue Saudi officials responsible for their torture in the British courts. In October, the Saudi government decided it would not contest an order to pay the men's costs, yet has failed to do so. It has promised to take the case to the House of Lords.
How many Lords have the Saudis bought?
Bindman and partners, lawyers for William Sampson, Sandy Mitchell and Les Walker, will now apply to the high court sheriff to seize sufficient commercial property to meet the costs, believed to be more than £100,000. Bindman and partners have made clear they will send the sheriff in to seize Saudi property as soon as possible. They are not entitled to enter the Saudi embassy, as it is covered by diplomatic immunity and regarded as foreign territory.

However, any commercial property owned by the Saudi state in Britain is regarded fair game. That includes Saudi Arabian airlines, as well as houses and cars used for commercial purposes by Saudi officials or employees.
A Saudi airlines 767 should do it.
The Saudi embassy could not be reached for comment on Monday, but lawyers for the kingdom indicated in court that they would seek to overturn the order to pay costs by asserting immunity, setting the stage for further legal arguments.

Lawyers for the three men subsequently asked the Court of Appeal to prevent Saudi representatives from relying on immunity in the costs issue, but the court on Monday rejected the application, said Tamsin Allen, one of the British men's attorneys. Hailing the court's decision, Allen said she was appalled by the Saudis' delaying tactics. "We, our clients and the public funding authorities are outraged that Saudi Arabia, one of the richest states in the world, should force the legal aid board to pay its debts and at the same time use our courts to seek immunity from torture claims." William Sampson pointed out that the Saudis had agreed not to challenge the cost order when it was granted in October and were now seeking to renege.
Posted by:Steve White

#2  How about a couple of Saudi air-hostesses?
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-05-18 05:04  

#1  "Just give us on o' them flash Bentleys. Each."
Posted by: mojo   2005-05-18 00:44  

00:00