Hughes v Alan Dick & Co Ltd.

Hughes v Alan Dick & Co Ltd.

The employment judge correctly applied the legal test from Lawson v Serco, finding that the claimant's employment was more strongly connected to Nigeria than to the UK, and thus Section 94 did not apply. The absence of equivalent Nigerian rights and the risk of employers evading UK law by posting employees abroad were not relevant factors.

Parties
Appellant: John Hughes; Respondent: Alan Dick & Co Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (oral Renewal)
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Territorial Jurisdiction, Expatriate Employees

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Hughes

Appellant

Alan Dick & Co Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (oral Renewal)

  1. 1 Whether an employee working entirely abroad for a UK company can claim unfair dismissal under Section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The employment judge correctly applied the legal test from Lawson v Serco, finding that the claimant's employment was more strongly connected to Nigeria than to the UK, and thus Section 94 did not apply. The absence of equivalent Nigerian rights and the risk of employers evading UK law by posting employees abroad were not relevant factors.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal dismissed