Overview: Economic and Safety Regulation

Abstract

The Supreme Court decided 15 cases involving economic and safety regulation in the 2011-12 legal year. Two cases involved commercial disputes. In Rainy Sky SA and others v Kookmin Bank,1 the Supreme Court reviewed principles of contract interpretation. In weighing two possible constructions of an ambiguous provision in a commercial contract, the SupremeCourt reinforced the principle that it is generally appropriate to choose the interpretation that is consistent with `business common sense'. Thus, to determine what the parties intended contract language to mean, courts may look to the commercial purpose of the agreement. In SerVaas Incorporated v Rafidian Bank and others,2 the Supreme Court addressed the scope of the commercial activity exception to sovereign immunity. According to a UK-wide statute, judgments may be enforced against state property that is `in use or intended for use for commercial purposes'.3 SerVaas obtained a default judgment in France against the Iraqi government in connection with a commercial contract and sought to enforce the judgment in England through a third party debt order over funds Rafidian Bank owed to Iraq. The Iraqi government argued successfully that the funds did not fall into the commercial activity exception because it did not intend to use Rafidian's funds for any commercial purpose. The Supreme Court observed that the origins of the underlying debt were irrelevant in determining whether the funds were `in use' for commercial purposes. The Supreme Court issued six decisions related to employment law, including three regarding workplace discrimination. In Russell and others v Transocean International Resources Limited and others,4 the Supreme Court examined whether the Working Time Regulations 1998 required that offshore workers in the oil and gas industry receive additional paid leave. Offshore employees generally alternate between two weeks working offshore and two weeks of onshore leave and