header-logo header-logo

Employment orphans

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

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 This section was repealed as a result of the EU Posted Workers Directive (96/71/EC) and to address highlighted injustices to employees.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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll