header-logo header-logo

30 October 2009 / Elliot Gold
Issue: 7391 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Not in my name

Elliot Gold discusses the scenario of dismissal resulting from a request by a third party

When a third party demands the removal of a worker employed by a supplier, both the worker and the supplier enter a type of twilight-zone. It may bring to an end the employment relationship between them but without the safeguards of the normal disciplinary processes.

Both parties may feel hard done-by and the supplier may find itself entangled in a claim for unfair dismissal due to decisions made by the third party that are beyond its control.

Drawing the strands together

The law relating to when such a dismissal will be unfair has bounced around the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) and the Court of Appeal. Emerging from what amounts almost to a daisy chain of cases, each referring to one other, the EAT in Henderson v CST Limited [2009] UKEAT/0209/09/SM has drawn together all the strands, adding a few fibres of its own.

The upshot is that a company supplying its workers to a third party and who is told by that third party to remove one of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll