This is a preview. To continue reading, register for free access now. Register now or Log in

Successive fixed-term contracts of nine years not converted into permanent contracts

expand
Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2011] IRLR 498 SC (1 other report)
The Supreme Court, the highest court in the UK, disagreed with all the lower courts on this issue. The employment tribunal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal, and the Court of Appeal had all held that the use of successive fixed-term contracts was not objectively justified.
- Tribunal jurisdiction: Teachers employed abroad by Government can bring unfair dismissal claims in Great Britain
  
  Date:
  
  8 November 2011
  
  In Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2011] IRLR 498 SC, the Supreme Court held that the employment of teachers seconded to European Schools on successive fixed-term contracts was objectively justified. However, the teachers could bring unfair dismissal claims in Great Britain in respect of the non-renewal of those contracts, even though they worked wholly abroad.

fixed-term workers | successive fixed-term contracts | justification

The Supreme Court has held that it was objectively justified to employ teachers on successive fixed-term contracts amounting to nine years in total, and that these contracts were not converted into permanent contracts.

Employment law cases

Successive fixed-term contracts of nine years not converted into permanent contracts

Tribunal jurisdiction: Teachers employed abroad by Government can bring unfair dismissal claims in Great Britain

Read more items tagged with the same topics

About this resource

Successive fixed-term contracts of nine years not converted into permanent contracts