Iran filed a case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Tuesday challenging Canada’s jurisdiction over civil damages cases related to alleged terrorism.

Iran claims that Canada has adopted and implemented a series of legislative, executive and judicial measures against Iran and its property in breach of Canada’s international obligations. These measures have abrogated the immunities to which Iran is entitled, both with respect to jurisdictional immunity and immunity from measures of constraint. As a result, Iran argues that Canada must respect its jurisdictional immunity under international law and should not allow civil claims against the country for alleged support of terrorism. The Islamic Republic also claims that Canada has no right to seize Iranian property in order to enforce such judgments.

Iran’s filing at the ICJ cited a ruling by the Ontario Superior Court which designated the Iranian military’s downing of Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752 in 2020 as an “act of terrorism.” The court ruling allowed families of the victims—many of whom had Canadian citizenship or residency—to seek compensation in a Canadian court. This case, along with other civil damages cases related to alleged terrorist acts committed by Iran, has led to a dispute between Iran and Canada over jurisdiction and the exercise of immunity under international law.

The court previously ruled on both issues in Germany v. Italy. Regarding jurisdictional immunity, the ICJ held, “[U]nder customary international law as it presently stood, a State was not deprived of immunity by reason of the fact that it was accused of serious violations of international human rights law or the international law of armed conflict.” When it came to immunity from measures of constraint, the court found that states generally enjoy immunity from pre-judgment measures of constraint, such as attachment or arrest, against state-owned property.

Canada has not yet responded to the filing of the case at the ICJ.