In Re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001

In this case appeal was sought from orders dated January 10, 2006 entered in district court for the Southern District of New York (Casy J.), which dismissed claims against certain Saudi Arabian defendants for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction.

The plaintiffs/ appellants were persons who incurred losses in September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks: those who suffered personal injuries, the families and representatives of those who died, insurers and property owners. They brought tort claims against number of parties: foreign governments, charitable entities, and individuals alleged to have provided financial and logistical support to al-Qaeda in the runup to the attacks. Appellants preferred appeal in respect of seven of the dismissed defendants: the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, four Saudi Princess, a Saudi Banker, and the Saudi High Commission.

The chief issue in appeal was the scope of foreign sovereign immunity. The court observed that The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 clearly grants foreign sovereign immunity from suit in United States subject to enumerated exceptions.
After going through arguments of both sides on January 18, 2008 and having observed the law of land, the court held:

1. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) grants immunity to individual officials of a foreign government too for their official-capacity acts, and thus four Saudi princes were entitled to immunity.

2. The district court properly concluded that a Saudi High Commission was an "agency or instrumentality" of the Kingdom and therefore entitled to immunity under the FSIA.

3. None of the exceptions to the FSIA applied and

4. Plaintiffs did not establish a prima facie case that the district court had jurisdiction over defendants.

Accordingly, through its judgment dated 14th August, 2008 the court affirmed order of district court of Southern District of New York (Casy J.) and dismissed above appeal.