header-logo header-logo

04 February 2010 / David Tyme
Issue: 7403 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

New territory

David Tyme explores the territorial scope of unfair dismissals

Mr Duncombe was employed by the secretary of state for children, schools and families (the department) as a teacher to work in a European school in Germany. The majority of  teachers seconded to the school were centrally employed by the state.

However, teachers from the UK were usually employed by the local authority or by the school’s governing body. The prevailing Staff Regulations limits, save in exceptional circumstances, a secondment to nine years whereafter the secondment terminates.

Duncombe was employed on successive fixed term contracts, between January 1996 and September 2006 and commenced proceedings alleging unfair and wrongful dismissal following the expiration of his final fixed term contract.

The fundamental issue for determination was whether his contract of employment is to be viewed as a fixed term employment contract with an objectively justifiable maximum term of nine years or whether the contract was converted by virtue of the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2034) (The 2002 Regulations) into a permanent contract

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll