header-logo header-logo

27 March 2015 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Unconventional

piggot

Embassies’ employment immunities are in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, as Charles Pigott reports

In Benkharbouche and Janah v Embassy of the Republic of Sudan and others [2015] EWCA Civ 33, [2015] All ER (D) 51 the Court of Appeal had to decide whether ss 4 and 16 of the State Immunity Act 1978 (SIA 1978) were effective to bar employment claims in the UK from London embassy service staff.

Ms Benkharbouche is a Moroccan national who was employed as a cook at the Sudanese embassy. Ms Janah, also Moroccan, worked as a member of the domestic staff at the Libyan embassy. Both brought claims for unfair dismissal and breaches of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833). Ms Janah also brought claims for racial discrimination and harassment.

Their claims were dismissed by the employment tribunal. The issue before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) (which heard their appeals together in April 2013) and before the Court of Appeal was whether Art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) in effect

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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