Territorial Jurisdiction

Thanks to Barnaby Large of No.18 Barristers Chambers for preparing this case summary.

Did the employment tribunal have jurisdiction to determine the claims of a US citizen, employed by a US company, paid in dollars but who lived and worked in London for half of his employed time?

No, on the facts as found by the employment tribunal, held the EAT in Fuller Appellant v United Healthcare Services.

The Respondents argued the employment tribunal did not have territorial jurisdiction to hear the numerous claims submitted by the Claimant, as the Claimant's employment did not have sufficient connection to the UK.

In particular, the Claimant was an American citizen, the Respondent was incorporated in the US and paid the Claimant in US dollars. Whilst half of the Claimant's many assignments involved working in London and living in rental accommodation there provided for him by the Respondent.

At PHR (now preliminary hearing) the employment tribunal dismissed the claims on grounds of jurisdiction. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT found, in light of the facts as found by the employment tribunal, the decision was one which it was entitled to make and there was no error in the application of the law on jurisdiction to the facts.