Fiji-based High Commission employee cannot bring UK tribunal claim
A Fleet and Security Manager who worked for the British High Commission in Fiji lost his unfair dismissal claim after the tribunal ruled it had no territorial jurisdiction to hear the case.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #territorial-jurisdiction
- #locally-recruited
- #expatriate
- #fijian-employment-law
- #diplomatic-immunity
Key facts
- Mr Singh was employed as a Fleet and Security Manager at the British High Commission in Fiji.
- He was a dual Fijian/British national and lived in Fiji.
- His employment contract was governed by Fijian law and subject to Fijian courts.
- He was paid in Fijian dollars and contributed to the Fiji National Provident Fund.
- The FCO applied for a preliminary hearing to determine territorial jurisdiction.
- The tribunal found that Mr Singh's connection with Great Britain was not overwhelmingly closer than with Fiji.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mr Singh began employment as Fleet and Security Manager at the British High Commission in Fiji.
-
Dismissal
Mr Singh was dismissed on grounds of gross misconduct.
-
Early conciliation started
Early conciliation began.
-
Early conciliation ended
Early conciliation ended.
-
Claim presented
Mr Singh presented claims of unfair dismissal, refusal of union representation, disability discrimination, and race discrimination.
-
Jurisdiction application
FCO applied for a preliminary hearing to determine territorial jurisdiction.
-
Preliminary hearing
The tribunal heard submissions on territorial jurisdiction.
-
Judgment given
The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.
The legal issue
Whether the Employment Tribunal had territorial jurisdiction to hear claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination, and other statutory rights brought by an employee who lived and worked in Fiji for the British High Commission.
The outcome
The tribunal ruled that it had no jurisdiction to hear any of the claims brought by the employee.
The key reason was that the employee's employment was governed by Fijian law, he was paid in Fijian dollars, contributed to the Fiji National Provident Fund, and his connection with Great Britain was not overwhelmingly closer than with Fiji.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you work abroad for a UK government department, check whether your contract is governed by local law — this can determine where you can bring a claim.
- Dual nationality and past service in the British army do not automatically give you access to UK employment tribunals if your work is based overseas.
- Employers should clearly state the governing law and jurisdiction in employment contracts for locally recruited staff abroad.
- Before bringing a claim, consider whether the Employment Tribunal has territorial jurisdiction — a preliminary hearing may be needed.
A case about where claims can be brought
This case shows that even if you work for a UK government department, the Employment Tribunal may not have the power to hear your claim if you are based overseas. The employee was a Fleet and Security Manager at the British High Commission in Fiji, a dual Fijian/British national who lived in Fiji. His contract stated it was governed by Fijian law and subject to Fijian courts. He was paid in Fijian dollars and contributed to the Fiji National Provident Fund.
What the tribunal considered
The tribunal applied the test of whether the employee's connection with Great Britain was overwhelmingly closer than with the country where he worked. Despite his British citizenship and army service, the tribunal found that the factors linking him to Fiji — his residence, local contract, payment in local currency, and local social security contributions — meant the UK tribunal had no jurisdiction.
What this means for similar claims
For anyone working abroad for a UK employer, the key question is whether their employment has a sufficient connection to Great Britain. Factors such as where the employee lives, where they are paid, and the governing law of the contract are crucial. This case is a reminder that territorial jurisdiction can be a significant hurdle for expatriate workers.
Similar cases
British Council employee in Dubai wins right to bring UK tribunal claim despite diplomatic immunity
An HR Business Partner who worked for the British Council in Dubai has won the right to bring unfair dismissal and discrimination claims in the UK, after the tribunal ruled that diplomatic immunity in the UAE did not leave her without a remedy.
CEO working from Poland fails to bring UK unfair dismissal claim
A chief executive who lived in Poland and worked remotely for a UK software firm had his unfair dismissal claim thrown out because the tribunal lacked territorial jurisdiction.
Commodities inspector never worked in UK: tribunal dismisses all claims
A commodities inspector who never set foot in Great Britain for work has had his unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions and breach of contract claims thrown out. The tribunal ruled it had no jurisdiction because the rights he relied on did not apply to him.
India-based software engineer unable to bring UK claim: territorial jurisdiction limits
An Indian-based software engineer who worked for an Indian subsidiary of Alten Limited has had his unfair dismissal and discrimination claims dismissed because the UK tribunal lacked territorial jurisdiction.