Oppenheimer v Cattermole
The English courts would refuse to recognise a Nazi decree depriving Jewish emigrants of German nationality and their property, because it was a grave infringement of human rights contrary to public policy.
Facts
Mr Oppenheimer, a German Jewish teacher, emigrated to England in 1939. Under a Nazi decree of 1941, Jews who were living abroad were deprived of their German nationality and their property was confiscated. He later became a British subject. For tax purposes, the question arose whether he was still a German national, because he was entitled to tax relief under a double taxation agreement with Germany only if he was not a German national.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that he had lost his German nationality under later German law, and so was not entitled to the relief, but several of their Lordships said that the 1941 decree would not have been recognised. Lord Cross said that a law of this sort constitutes so grave an infringement of human rights that the courts of this country ought to refuse to recognise it as a law at all, because it deprived a whole class of citizens of their nationality and property on racial grounds. The case established that the English courts may refuse on public policy grounds to recognise foreign laws which flagrantly violate human rights.
Related cases on domicile, property, foreign states and public policy
- Belhaj v Straw [2017] UKSC 3, [2017] AC 964
- British South Africa Co v Companhia de Moçambique [1893] AC 602
- In the Estate of Fuld (No 3) [1968] P 675
- Islamic Republic of Iran v Barakat Galleries Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 1374, [2009] QB 22
- Kuwait Airways Corp v Iraqi Airways Co (Nos 4 and 5) [2002] UKHL 19, [2002] 2 AC 883
- Lucasfilm Ltd v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39, [2012] 1 AC 208
- Maduro Board of the Central Bank of Venezuela v Guaidó Board of the Central Bank of Venezuela [2021] UKSC 57
- Mark v Mark [2005] UKHL 42, [2006] 1 AC 98
Studying conflict of laws? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
