The applicant was a cashier on a ship. She made a complaint of sex harassment and discrimination. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction because she worked abroad.
Held: Her work was done mainly outside Great Britain.
Neill LJ said: ‘Thus s10(1) provides in effect that for the purposes of Part II all employment . . is to be regarded as being employment at an establishment in Great Britain ‘unless the employee does his work wholly or mainly outside Great Britain’. No account has to be taken therefore of such matters as the nationality of the parties or of the place where the contract was made or of the proper law of the contract or even (as far as this definition is concerned) of the question whether the work is done at an establishment at all. In my judgment the words ‘is to be regarded as being’ are not there to create a statutory presumption but to provide for an all-embracing definition to cover all employment other than that which is excluded specifically.’ However the ship did constitute an establishment within the Act.
Judges:
Neill LJ
Citations:
[1986] ICR 357
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
Cited – Saggar v Ministry of Defence CA 27-Apr-2005
The claimant sought to bring an action for race discrimination. The defendant argued that the alleged acts of discrimination took place whilst he was on a posting abroad in Cyprus after serving 16 years in England, and that therefore the tribunal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.222587
