Lodge v Dignity & Choice in Dying & Anor (Jurisdictional Points: Working outside the jurisdiction) [2014] UKEAT 0252_14_0212 (02 December 2014)

Lodge v Dignity & Choice in Dying & Anor (Jurisdictional Points: Working outside the jurisdiction) [2014] UKEAT 0252_14_0212 (02 December 2014)

The claimant, though working remotely from Australia, performed all her work for the benefit of the respondents’ UK operation, under a contract governed by English law, with grievances handled in London, and had no right to claim in Australia; therefore, there was an especially strong connection to Great Britain and British employment law, and the Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0252_14_0212
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mrs Lodge; Respondent 1: Dignity and Choice in Dying; Respondent 2: Compassion in Dying
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
02 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Jurisdictional Ruling
Outcome
Appeal allowed; jurisdictional ruling reversed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Unfair Dismissal, Whistleblowing, Extraterritorial Application
Employment Law Jurisdiction Unfair Dismissal Whistleblowing Extraterritorial Application

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Lodge

Appellant/claimant

Dignity and Choice in Dying

Respondent 1

Compassion in Dying

Respondent 2

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Jurisdictional Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction over Employment Rights Act claims by an employee working remotely from Australia for a UK employer
  2. 2 Whether the connection between the employment and Great Britain is 'especially strong' as required by case law

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant, though working remotely from Australia, performed all her work for the benefit of the respondents’ UK operation, under a contract governed by English law, with grievances handled in London, and had no right to claim in Australia; therefore, there was an especially strong connection to Great Britain and British employment law, and the Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; jurisdictional ruling reversed

Orders

  • Declaration that the Employment Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s Employment Rights Act claims
  • Case to proceed to a hearing on the merits