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.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #territorial-jurisdiction
- #expatriate-employee
- #remote-work
- #poland
- #ceo
Key facts
- The claimant lived in Poland and worked remotely throughout his engagement.
- He visited Great Britain for work about 18 days per year.
- Payment was made to companies in Poland and Bulgaria, not directly to the claimant.
- The claimant paid no UK tax and had no expectation of UK employment rights.
- The respondent is based in Great Britain with a multinational business.
Timeline
-
Engagement as CEO
The claimant was engaged by the respondent as Chief Executive Officer, working remotely from Poland.
-
Internal report on discussions
Chairman Greg Pritchett reported that the claimant wanted to be contracted rather than employed through his Polish company for tax reasons.
-
Formal offer made
The respondent made a formal offer identifying salary in sterling and stating employment would be subject to Polish law.
-
Draft contract rejected
The claimant rejected a draft contract that referred to him as an employee; an amended version changed his status to contractor.
-
Engagement terminated
The respondent terminated the claimant's engagement. The claimant alleged unpaid salary and notice pay.
-
Preliminary hearing on jurisdiction
The tribunal heard argument on whether it had territorial jurisdiction over the claimant's claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the Employment Rights Act 1996 applied to a claimant who lived in Poland, worked remotely, and had only limited physical presence in Great Britain.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages on the basis that it had no territorial jurisdiction.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant lived in Poland throughout his engagement and worked remotely from there or the Netherlands.
- He visited Great Britain for work only about 18 days per year.
- His salary was paid to companies in Poland and Bulgaria, not directly to him, and he paid no UK tax.
- The employment relationship was more closely connected to Poland than to Great Britain.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed at the jurisdictional stage.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you live and work abroad, you will generally need an especially strong connection to Great Britain to bring a UK employment tribunal claim.
- Factors like paying UK tax, being based in the UK, or having a UK employment contract can help establish territorial jurisdiction.
- A UK-based employer does not automatically give you UK employment rights if you work entirely from another country.
- Keep records of your work location, travel, and contractual terms to assess which country's employment laws apply to you.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the high hurdle faced by employees who live and work abroad but want to bring claims under UK employment law. The claimant was a chief executive who worked remotely from Poland for a UK software company. Despite his senior role and the company's UK base, the tribunal found that his connection to Great Britain was too weak to justify applying the Employment Rights Act 1996.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have sought to establish a stronger UK connection by, for example, having a UK employment contract, being paid directly into a UK bank account, paying UK tax, or spending more time working in Great Britain. The fact that his salary was paid to companies in Poland and Bulgaria, and that he paid no UK tax, weighed heavily against him.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces the principle that UK employment tribunals will not automatically hear claims from expatriate employees. The 'true expatriate' test requires an especially strong connection to Great Britain, which is difficult to prove when the employee lives and works abroad. Anyone considering a UK claim while based overseas should carefully assess their ties to the UK before proceeding.
Similar cases
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.
Expat finance manager with 11 years' service loses unfair dismissal claim over territorial jurisdiction
A finance manager who lived and worked in Uganda and Nigeria for over a decade failed to bring his unfair dismissal and discrimination claims in the UK. The tribunal ruled his employment lacked a sufficient connection to Great Britain.
British expat in Qatar: tribunal has no jurisdiction over claims against UK parent company
An Academic Manager working in Qatar for a BAE Systems subsidiary failed to establish that her employment had a sufficiently close connection to Great Britain. The tribunal struck out her claims of unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and whistleblowing.