Mr L Folivi v Golden World Care Service Limited — 2023

The tribunal was asked to decide whether the Scottish Employment Tribunal could determine the claimant’s proceedings. It found that the claim had been started by a completed online claim form in accordance with rule 8(1), but that the claims did not satisfy rule 8(3) because no part of the relevant Great Britain connection was with Scotland. The claimant had been recruited for work in Croydon, the respondent’s offices and clients were in Croydon and Lambeth, the work was done in Croydon, and the contract chose English and Welsh law.

The judge held that the claimant’s residence in Scotland did not establish the necessary territorial connection for rule 8(3). The tribunal relied on the evidence of the respondent’s manager that the claimant was told the clients were based in Croydon and asked how he would get to a 7 am shift from Scotland. The judge also noted that the tribunal rules do not themselves create or remove substantive jurisdiction, which arises from the underlying statutes.

The tribunal treated the rule 8(3) issue as a procedural irregularity under rule 6 rather than something that made the proceedings void. It referred the case to the President or Vice President for consideration under rule 99, which governs transfer between Scotland and England and Wales. The order dismissing the claims would only take effect if the rule 99 application is refused, so this judgment did not determine the merits of the underlying discrimination or wages claims and no remedy was awarded.