Lawyers representing alleged victims of violent abuse and torture by British colonial forces in Cyprus during the 1950s have scored a landmark success in their fight for compensation. In a decision that broke new legal ground, the High Court ruled that the claims should be decided under English, not Cypriot, law.
Thirty-four Cypriot nationals claimed to have suffered assaults, beatings, rapes and other acts of violence at the hands of British soldiers, police and colonial agents during the Cyprus emergency between 1956 and 1958. Lawyers on their behalf had launched proceedings against the Secretaries of State for Defence and for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
The Court was called upon to decide as a preliminary issue whether, in considering the claims, English or Cypriot law should be applied, in particular in relation to limitation periods. The Court noted that the wrongs alleged had all been committed in Cyprus and that, ordinarily, Cypriot law would prevail.
However, in applying a flexible exception to the rule, the Court noted that, if Cypriot law were applied, it would be open to the British government to claim exemption from liability under the principle of sovereign immunity. Given the gravity of the claims, it was right that the Government should be held to account in its own courts, and under its own laws, rather than under colonial laws that it had itself created.
Although alleged assailants may in many cases have been acting on behalf of the colonial authorities, rather than the British Crown directly, many key decision had emanated from London during the emergency and it was the authorities in London that at the time bore overall responsibility for justice in Cyprus.
Modern and familiar principles of English law were in any event well equipped to address the difficult issues raised by the case. Recognising the importance of its decision, the Court granted the Secretaries of State permission to challenge its ruling in the Court of Appeal.