Spending more time in England than any other country does not necessarily mean that a peripatetic employee can claim unfair dismissal here; the key factor is where the employee is based.
A Danish peripatetic employee carrying out an international role based in Switzerland had freely entered into a contract with a Bermudan company subject to Bermudian governing law and jurisdiction. He had chosen to do so in preference to a UK law contract and made arrangements so that he was not subject to UK taxation. Although he spent just under half of his working time in the UK, and this was more than the time spent in any other one country, his employment was not sufficiently closely connected with the UK and UK law for him to be able to claim unfair dismissal.
The President of the EAT also observed that, given case law developments, the question of “sufficiently close connection” is now a question of fact and therefore a decision by a properly directed tribunal will only be appealable if perverse. (Olsen v Gearbulk Services, EAT)
Key contacts
Steve Bell
Managing Partner - Employment, Industrial Relations and Safety (Australia, Asia), Melbourne
Emma Rohsler
Regional Head of Practice (EMEA) - Employment Pensions and Incentives, Paris
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.