A recent Court of Appeal decision helps clarify employment law’s territorial scope, says Charles Pigott
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Clyde & Co v Van Winkelhof [2012] EWCA Civ 1207 is best known for its ruling on the status of LLP members, which, it said, cannot be workers for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996). However it also confirmed the employment tribunal’s decision that a LLP member was able to bring a claim for sex discrimination against a London-based legal firm, despite spending most of her time working in Tanzania.
Normally, an adverse ruling on worker status would rule out proceedings in the employment tribunal, but the claim was brought under the limited partnership provisions in s 45 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). It arose from the circumstances in which Ms Van Winkelhof had been dismissed by a Tanzanian joint venture for which she did most of her work, which in turn led to her expulsion from Clyde & Co’s partnership. The LLP argued, as a preliminary point, that her sex discrimination claim had insufficient connection
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7806223b_1)
