Court of Appeal dismisses Kingdom of Spain’s state immunity argument in employment discrimination claim

The former employee, Lydia Lorenzo, who resides in London and holds dual UK and Spanish nationality, initially lodged a claim shortly after leaving her role at the embassy in 2015, alleging unfair dismissal and race discrimination.

Ms Lorenzo’s claim, which alleged that disparaging remarks had been made about her and British people in general, was previously given permission to proceed at the London Central Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal. 

The Kingdom of Spain argued that it should have state immunity from the claim, but this argument was not upheld in the two employment tribunal judgments – a decision which was challenged at the Court of Appeal in November 2024.  

However, this challenge was dismissed by a judge in a decision handed down on 20 December 2024, which ruled that the Kingdom of Spain should not be entitled to state immunity and that Ms Lorenzo’s dual Spanish nationality did not change this.  

It was also ruled that Ms Lorenzo’s work at the embassy, which involved carrying out administrative duties for diplomats, constituted domestic rather than diplomatic duties and did not fall under the remit of international law, meaning that her claim should not be affected by state immunity legislation.  

As well as rejecting the Kingdom of Spain’s appeal, the judge asked the Secretary of State to consider making a declaration that section 4(2)(a) of the State Immunity Act (SIA) is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights – a move which could result in an amendment to legislation.  

Section 4(2)(a) of the SIA states that immunity should apply between a state and nationals of that state in its embassies. However, the judge stated in his decision that this was superseded by legislation from the Vienna Convention on international treaties, which rules that immunity should not apply in respect of locally recruited staff who are nationals and permanent residents of the country that the embassy is based in, which Ms Lorenzo was. 

The judge also remarked on the excessive length of time that Ms Lorenzo’s case had taken. After the claim was initially held up in September 2016 while awaiting the outcome of a similar case in the Supreme Court, Ms Lorenzo has since waited several years for her case to be heard first at the Employment Tribunal and then the Employment Appeal Tribunal.  

Leigh Day human rights partner Ryan Bradshaw, who represents Ms Lorenzo, said: 

“I am delighted on behalf of my client, Ms Lorenzo, that the Court of Appeal has stood firm against the Kingdom of Spain’s argument that they should be protected by state immunity in this claim. It is an important judgment which reinforces that discriminatory practices should not be considered above the law in any workplace. We also welcome the judge’s comments on the time that it has taken to reach this point, justice delayed is often justice denied.”