Iryna Malyk v Teleperformance Contact Ltd — 2026

The Tribunal dismissed Iryna Malyk's unfair dismissal claim. It found that Teleperformance Contact Ltd dismissed her for some other substantial reason after she moved to France and continued working there despite an instruction to work from the UK. The Respondent believed it could not continue employing her in France under a UK contract without legal risk, and a transfer to a French contract was not viable because of costs and reductions in staff there. The Tribunal rejected the contention that the dismissal was intended to avoid a redundancy process.

The Tribunal found that the employment contract expressly required the Claimant to work from her home in the UK when its terms were read together, including her Bristol address, the description of her principal workplace as her home office, the application of UK law and the requirement for eligibility to work in the UK. Alternatively, it found that working in the UK was an implied term under the business efficacy and officious bystander tests. The instruction to work from the UK was therefore a reasonable management instruction and did not breach the contract. Dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses because the Claimant continued working from France and the Respondent was entitled to act to prevent the potential legal risk identified.

The Tribunal also found the procedure fair. Use of the disciplinary procedure and the Claimant's suspension were appropriate in view of her continued refusal to comply with the instruction and the perceived ongoing legal risk. Although it would have been good practice to confirm the continuation of the suspension after the disciplinary hearing, this did not make the procedure unfair. The appeal was not upheld.

The wrongful dismissal claim, addressed in the reasons as a breach of contract claim, was dismissed. It was first presented on 26 September 2025, approximately nine months after the usual three-month time limit had expired, and the Tribunal found that it had been reasonably practicable to present it sooner. The Tribunal further found that the claim would have failed on its merits because the instruction, disciplinary action and dismissal did not breach the employment contract. No monetary award was made.