header-logo header-logo

27 November 2009 / Sara Khoja
Issue: 7395 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment orphans

Sara Khoja considers the territorial scope of UK employment law

Where do you work? Who is your employer? For an internationally mobile employee working in more than one jurisdiction or more than one company within a group the position is not always clear.

The answers depend on various factors and will determine the employee’s employment rights and the employer’s obligations and potential exposure when terminating employment.

Exception rather than rule

In recent years there has been a steady flow of cases in the appeal courts determining the territorial scope of UK statutory employment rights. These largely result from the repeal in 1999 of s 196 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) setting out the act’s territorial scope. This section was repealed as a result of the EU Posted Workers Directive (96/71/EC) and to address highlighted injustices to employees. Nevertheless, it remains the exception rather than the norm for expatriate employees to receive the benefits of UK employment law.

Diggins v Condor Marine Crewing Services Limited [2009] EWCA Civ 1133, [2009] All ER

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll