22 U.S.C. § 286h
Status, privileges, and immunities of the United States
The provisions of article IX, sections 2 to 9, both inclusive, and the first sentence of article VIII, section 2(b), of the Articles of Agreement of the Fund, and the provisions of article VI, section 5(i), and article VII, sections 2 to 9, both inclusive, of the Articles of Agreement of the Bank, shall have full force and effect in the United States and its Territories and possessions upon acceptance of membership by the United States in, and the establishment of, the Fund and the Bank, respectively.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1 (1982).
Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1 (1982). “[21] Not only have some of the specific tax exemptions contained in international agreements been incorporated into a federal statute, see 22 U. S. C. § 286h, but also the International Organizations Immunities Act has explicitly afforded a federal tax exemption for those G-4…”
Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 139 S. Ct. 759 (2019). “See 22 U. S. C. §286h. But UNRRA, the World Bank, the FAO, and the UN itself all originally depended upon the Immunities Act for the immunity they sought.”
William F. Callejo, Individually & as Tr., & Adelfa B. Callejo, as Tr. v. Bancomer, S.A., 764 F.2d 1101 (5th Cir. 1985). “See 22 U.S.C. § 286h (1982) (incorporating Art.”
Libra Bank Ltd. v. Banco Nacional De Costa Rica, S.A., 570 F. Supp. 870 (S.D.N.Y. 1983). “Article VIII, section 2(b) has been enacted into law by 22 U.S.C. § 286h (1976) (“[Tjhe first sentence of Article VIII, section 2(b) .”
Polak v. Int'l Monetary Fund, 657 F. Supp. 2d 116 (D.D.C. 2009). “One of the Articles of Agreement incorporated by the BWAA provides that “[t]he [defendant], its property and its assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that it expressly waives its immunity…”
John Does 1-7 v. Taliban, 101 F.4th 1 (D.C. Cir. 2024). “VII § 3; see 22 U.S.C. § 286h (incorporating the World Bank’s articles into U.”
Braka v. Bancomer, S.A., 589 F. Supp. 1465 (S.D.N.Y. 1984). “The IMF Articles provide that “[e]xchange contracts which involve the currency of any member and which are contrary to the exchange control regulations of that member maintained or imposed consistently with this Agreement shall be unenforceable in the territories of any member.”
Eugene Nyambal v. Int'l Monetary Fund, 772 F.3d 277 (D.C. Cir. 2014). “IX § 3 (given force of law by 22 U.S.C. § 286h); IOIA, Pub.L. No. 79-291, 59 Stat.”
Int'l Bank for Reconstruction & Dev. v. Dist. of Columbia, 996 F. Supp. 31 (D.D.C. 1998). “*34 (emphasis added) codified at 22 U.S.C. § 286h (1994) (“[Section 9 of the Agreement] shall have full force and effect in the United States____”).”
Int'l Bank for Reconstruction & Dev. v. Dist. of Columbia, 171 F.3d 687 (D.C. Cir. 1999). “One of the treaty’s provisions (Article VII, § 9(a)), which has “full force and effect” throughout the United States, see 22 U.S.C. § 286h, confers tax immunity on the Bank in the following terms: The Bank, its assets, property, income and its operations and transactions,…”
Leonard A. Sacks & Assocs. v. Int'l Monetary Fund, 26 F.4th 470 (D.C. Cir. 2022). “That same day, it also moved to dismiss the suit on immunity grounds pursuant to its Articles of Agreement, the relevant provisions of which are given effect in the United States by the Bretton Woods Act, 22 U.S.C. § 286h. Sacks did not dispute that the Fund is generally…”
Polak v. Int'l Monetary Fund (D.D.C. 2009). “at 3 (quoting 22 U.S.C. § 286h). One of the Articles of Agreement incorporated by the BWAA provides that “[t]he [defendant], its property and its assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.