header-logo header-logo

Not in my name

30 October 2009 / Elliot Gold
Issue: 7391 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Elliot Gold discusses the scenario of dismissal resulting from a request by a third party

When a third party demands the removal of a worker employed by a supplier, both the worker and the supplier enter a type of twilight-zone. It may bring to an end the employment relationship between them but without the safeguards of the normal disciplinary processes.

Both parties may feel hard done-by and the supplier may find itself entangled in a claim for unfair dismissal due to decisions made by the third party that are beyond its control.

Drawing the strands together

The law relating to when such a dismissal will be unfair has bounced around the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) and the Court of Appeal. Emerging from what amounts almost to a daisy chain of cases, each referring to one other, the EAT in Henderson v CST Limited [2009] UKEAT/0209/09/SM has drawn together all the strands, adding a few fibres of its own.

The upshot is that a company supplying its workers to a third party and who

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll