Project-affected individuals are increasingly bringing tort claims against international financial institutions in domestic courts. In the US, such plaintiffs such plaintiffs have regularly failed to overcome the obstacle of the defendant institutions’ jurisdictional immunity under the International Organizations Immunities Act. In pending litigation, the US Supreme Court has resolved a long-standing debate as to its scope.

This paper examines the issue of jurisdictional immunity in the context of international project finance. It focuses on the specific frameworks established in treaties, analyses the interplay between international and domestic US norms and looks at possible implications of the exercise of domestic jurisdiction.

A key finding is that US courts, at least previously, used to grant more extensive immunities than international law required. While doubts persist as to whether domestic courts are a suitable venue for claims brought by project-affected people, existing means of international dispute settlement should be strengthened.

受项目影响的个人越来越多地向国内法院的国际金融机构提出侵权诉讼。在美国，此类原告通常无法克服《国际组织豁免法》所规定的被告机构的司法豁免权的障碍。在未决诉讼中，美国最高法院解决了有关其范围的长期辩论。

本文研究了国际项目融资背景下的司法管辖豁免问题。它着重于条约中建立的特定框架，分析了美国国际国内规范之间的相互作用，并探讨了行使国内管辖权可能产生的影响。

一个关键发现是，至少在以前，美国法院曾经授予比国际法所要求的更大范围的豁免权。尽管人们对国内法院是否适合受项目影响的人民提起诉讼提出疑问，但应加强现有的国际争端解决手段。