Legal Opinion
Elliott v. British Tourist Authority
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 17, 1997No. 96 Civ. 9154(HB)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
BAER, District Judge. 1
Defendant, the British Tourist Authority (“BTA”), moves to dismiss plaintiffs complaint on the grounds that it is immune from the jurisdiction of the United States courts under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
The BTA is a wholly-owned, funded and directed agency of the British Government chartered to promote tourism to the United Kingdom. 2 See BTA Ex. B. It provides information to potential tourists, the U.S. media and the U.S. travel industry…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Republic of Argentina v. Weltover, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Sumitomo Shoji America, Inc. v. AvaglianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Cargill International S.A., and Cargill, B v. V. M/t Pavel Dybenko, Her Engines, Tackle, Etc., in Rem Novorossiysk Shipping Co., in PersonamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Marvin R. Broadbent v. Organization of American StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mukaddam v. Permanent Mission of Saudi Arabia to the United NationsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- El-Hadad v. Embassy of the United Arab EmiratesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Kato v. IshiharaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Sabol v. Cable & Wireless PLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005