0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

international forum shopping

25 February 2011

In a recent case against British Airways, the Court of Appeal has reminded us that the amount of work an employee need do in Great Britain before being able to bring an employment tribunal claim here, can be very small.

The case involved Hong Kong based cabin crew who flew to the UK 28 times each year. In London they completed a 45 minute de-brief before resting for about 58 hours in hotel accommodation and returning to Hong Kong.

The court found that this was sufficient to be employed “partly in Great Britain” for the purposes of the legislation, meaning the employees could bring race and age discrimination claims in the employment tribunals.

The case was decided under the old law, which has been replaced by the Equality Act 2010 which is unhelpfully silent on its territorial scope. For the time being employers who regularly send employees to do short periods of work in Great Britain should be alive to the possibly of domestic employment law applying to the arrangement.

related opinions

Anti-social media - but when is it work related?

As the use of social media continues to increase, its overlap with working life is becoming more and more prevalent.

View blog

IR35 changes - six months and counting...

In his 2018 Autumn Budget, the then Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, announced a significant change to the way liability for IR35 breaches will be dealt with for private sector companies from April 2020.

View blog

Court of Appeal confirms all employment tribunal judgments must be published on the register, except in national security cases

Under the ET Rules, all judgments and accompanying written reasons must be published on a pubic register which the general public can access online.

View blog

Supreme Court backs employers seeking to enforce restrictive covenants: Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd

The Supreme Court in Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd has determined that where post-termination restrictive covenants (i.e. “non-compete” clauses) in employment contracts go further than reasonably necessary to protect an employer’s business interests, it can apply the ‘blue pencil test,’ severing the offending words and leaving the remaining enforceable clause in place.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up