Al-Ateeqi v Kuwait Investment Authority
The EAT upheld state immunity in a former chief executive’s whistleblowing and dismissal proceedings. His diplomatic status was integral to his role, while wider observations about sovereign wealth management were additional, non-essential reasoning.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the Kuwait Investment Authority’s state immunity defence in Al-Ateeqi v Kuwait Investment Authority, in a judgment dated 5 November 2026. The appeal was heard on 21 and 22 July 2026. The decision prevented the employment claims from proceeding within the tribunal’s jurisdiction; it did not determine whether the claimant’s whistleblowing allegations were correct or whether his treatment would otherwise have infringed employment legislation. That distinction is fundamental when reporting a case decided on immunity rather than the merits of workplace conduct.
Mr Al-Ateeqi was chief executive of the Kuwait Investment Office in London, an office of the Kuwait Investment Authority. He brought claims alleging whistleblowing detriment and unfair dismissal, including automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Employment Judge Brown upheld the authority’s immunity defence in a judgment dated 16 July 2024. The EAT dismissed his appeal. It also dismissed the authority’s cross-appeal, explaining that the additional arguments did not require a cross-appeal against a decision that had already been favourable to it.