Okedina v Chikale

Okedina v Chikale

Sections 15 and 21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 do not expressly or impliedly prohibit employment contracts with persons lacking leave to remain, nor do they render such contracts unenforceable by either party. The common law illegality defence fails as the employee did not knowingly participate in the illegality. Public policy does not require depriving innocent employees of contractual remedies.

Parties
Appellant: Ivy Okedina; Respondent: Judith Chikale
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Illegality, Common Law Illegality, Employment Contract Enforceability, Immigration Status and Employment, Public Policy in Contract Law
Employment Law Immigration Law Statutory Illegality Common Law Illegality Employment Contract Enforceability Immigration Status and Employment Public Policy in Contract Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ivy Okedina

Appellant

Judith Chikale

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sections 15 and 21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 preclude an employee from pursuing contractual claims when their leave to remain has expired
  2. 2 Whether statutory or common law illegality renders the employment contract unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 15 and 21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 do not expressly or impliedly prohibit employment contracts with persons lacking leave to remain, nor do they render such contracts unenforceable by either party. The common law illegality defence fails as the employee did not knowingly participate in the illegality. Public policy does not require depriving innocent employees of contractual remedies.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant's appeal dismissed
  • Employment Tribunal's order for payment to respondent upheld