Jason Elliott was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2013 and is the Associate Head of School of Law at Ulster University. As a practising barrister, he has developed a largely civil practice representing individuals, companies and public bodies in litigation. This covers a wide range of areas including personal injuries, wills and employment law. In terms of employment law, he has represented both applicants and respondents in the Industrial Tribunal. At Ulster University, Jason lectures extensively on the civil areas of practise such as Equity and Trusts and delivers employment law lectures for both undergraduate and postgraduate students.
A break in between contracts with the respondent meant that the claimant did not have two years’ continuous service as required in England and Wales for an unfair dismissal claim.
The claimant was employed by the respondent charity as a Business Development Manager. He started this employment on 22nd July 2022. On 4th August 2023 the claimant was informed that there was a stop on projects and the charity was looking at overspends. The claimant was reminded that his contract was a one-year fixed contract and had ended in July 2023. They used this to outline termination of the contract. The claimant challenged this stating that the Lead Counsellor did not have authority to terminate it and that it had to be the Deputy General Manager or the Board. The Chair wrote to the claimant in September 2023 confirming termination of his contract with effect from 15th September. He was informed he would be paid one month’s pay in lieu of notice.
The claimant appealed this internally and through that was offered work two days per week. This second contract commenced on 22nd October on a fixed term basis of 12 months. The second contract ended in October 2024 without renewal and issues arose around unfair dismissal and continuity of employment.
The evidence from the claimant was that he continued to work from September 2023 until October 2023 despite the contractual hiatus. However, the Chair of the respondent stated that this was not the case and the claimant was not authorised during that period to act as a representative of the respondent. The Tribunal examining the evidence found that there was little if any evidence of work being completed by the claimant from 15th September 2023 until 22nd October 2023. As a result, there was no continuing work and it was a break in the continuity of the contract. This gap in employment meant that the claimant did not have the requisite 2 years continuous period of employment for unfair dismissal as required in England and Wales. Accordingly, the claim was dismissed.
Whilst the periods of continuous service in England and Wales and Northern Ireland are different the application of the law relating to gap in service is still useful. The fact that there was a break of one month in which the claimant did not undertake any work or duties with the respondent was crucial in breaking that chain and meant that the right not to be unfairly dismissed had not crystallised.
You can read the case in full here.
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
