Key Facts
- •Dispute between the 'Maduro Board' and 'Guaidó Board' over control of Venezuelan gold reserves held by the Bank of England.
- •HMG's recognition of Juan Guaidó as interim President of Venezuela (Feb 2019 - Jan 2023).
- •Supreme Court's 'one voice' principle requiring courts to align with the executive's position on foreign state recognition.
- •Five STJ Decisions (Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal of Justice) declared null and void various actions by the National Assembly and Guaidó.
- •Maduro Board argued STJ Decisions should be recognized, while Guaidó Board argued against it.
- •HMG's change in position in January 2023: no longer recognizes Guaidó as interim president.
Legal Principles
One Voice Doctrine
Supreme Court decision [2021] UKSC 57; [2023] AC 156
Act of State Doctrine
Supreme Court decision [2021] UKSC 57; [2023] AC 156
Recognition of Foreign Judgments
Dicey, Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws, 15th ed.
In rem Judgments
Carl Zeiss Stiftung v Rayner & Keeler (No.2) [1967] 1 AC 853; Air Foyle v Center Capital [2003] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 753; Pattni v Ali [2006] UKPC 51; [2007] 2 AC 85
Natural Justice
Article 6 of the ECHR
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The STJ Decisions depended on the view that Guaidó was not the President at the relevant time, conflicting with HMG's previous recognition of him. Therefore, the one voice principle prevents their recognition.
Stay application dismissed.
The appeal was ready to proceed; a stay would cause further delays and costs; the Maduro Board could still raise arguments based on changed circumstances.