header-logo header-logo

23 May 2019 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7841 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Working in the EU: the same but different?

A claim arising in the French office of an international law firm should stay in France, as Charles Pigott explains

In Ravisy v Simmons & Simmons LLP and Taylor UKEAT/0085/18 the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has endorsed an employment tribunal’s ruling that it had no jurisdiction to hear various claims under Equality Act 2010 brought by a Paris-based partner in an international legal practice.

The dispute over forced retirement

Like many UK-based international law firms Simmons & Simmons is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with members (still normally referred to as ‘partners’) working both in the UK and in a number of international offices, including Paris. The employment judge found that the Paris office was not a wholly independent business but enjoyed ‘the mixture of delegated autonomy and integrated control’ that would be expected for a ‘substantial national office’ of an international law business.

The claimant was a dual Madagascan and French national who had lived in France since the early 80s. She became

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

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll