Home > News > Okedina v Chikale – Employee in Breach of Immigration Rules Successful in Tribunal Claim

Okedina v Chikale – Employee in Breach of Immigration Rules Successful in Tribunal Claim

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) recently dismissed the appeal from an employer against an Employment Tribunal (“ET”) ruling of unfair dismissal from an employee who was working in breach of the Immigration Rules.

Read more

2 Responses to Okedina v Chikale – Employee in Breach of Immigration Rules Successful in Tribunal Claim

  1. Ade says:

    Both the ET & EAT errorneously applied false interpretation of the 3rd category of Hall’ Authority in allowing this illegal worker to enforce the illegal contract finding. Para. 26(4-5) of Enfield-Payne at EAT (adopted in Principle by CA in [2008] Civ 393) has given the right interpretation as that once an illegal performance of a contract was carried out (lack of leave to remain – lack of right to work – in the UK is an unarguably a perfect example) by the worker, the worker’s lack of not knowing of lack of her right to work is plainly irrelevant.
    What an irony considering the employer is accused of false information that has no relevance to the illegality.

    • lindsaygriffiths says:

      We understand from our firm that the case has been recently appealed unsuccessfully to the Court of Appeal (unfortunately, we cannot attach the relevant summary here in the comments) in which it was found that the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 could not be read as impliedly prohibiting contracts of employment, in the sense of rendering them unenforceable by either party, where the employee did not have the requisite immigration status.

Comments are closed.