The appellant appealed an order dismissing its action against a foreign state on sovereign immunity grounds.
The court held that the appellant failed to meet its burden under the State Immunity Act to show that the foreign state's alleged involvement in a state-owned airline's decision-making constituted commercial activity rather than sovereign oversight as shareholder and pursuit of governmental objectives.
The court rejected the submission that the motion should await discoveries, holding that sovereign immunity must be determined before the action proceeds.
The appeal was dismissed with agreed costs.
