Cases→4106045/2024

Claimant v HopeFull (SCIO) (Charity No SCO49842)

4 May 2025Before Employment Judge R McPhersonScotlandremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(sex)struck out

Tribunal determined it lacked territorial jurisdiction as claimant worked exclusively in Ukraine, managed day-to-day by Ukraine-based staff, with insufficient connection to Great Britain to engage UK employment law.

Harassment(sex)struck out

Tribunal determined it lacked territorial jurisdiction. Claimant volunteered in Ukraine under operational management of Ukraine-based leaders. Connection to UK insufficient under Ravat/Lawson principles.

Facts

Claimant, a French national resident in USA, volunteered intermittently with Scottish-based charity providing humanitarian aid in Ukraine from March 2022 to May 2024. She was never paid but received accommodation and food. All day-to-day operational management was carried out in Ukraine by Ukraine-based team leaders (Tom Hughes and Kevin Fisher). Claimant raised a safeguarding complaint about alleged sexual misconduct by Kevin Fisher in January 2024, reported to UK-based safeguarding officer. Claimant brought claims under ss.13 and 26 Equality Act 2010 for sex discrimination/harassment.

Decision

Tribunal dismissed claims for want of jurisdiction. First, claimant lacked sufficiently strong connection with Great Britain for UK employment law to apply extraterritorially—she worked exclusively in Ukraine under Ukraine-based management. Second, claimant was not an 'employee' under s.83(2) EA 2010: she was an unpaid volunteer with no contract of employment, no remuneration, no mutuality of obligation, and no personal obligation to perform work.

Practical note

A volunteer working abroad for a UK-based charity, managed day-to-day by local staff and receiving only accommodation/food (not remuneration), will not be protected by UK discrimination law—territorial jurisdiction and employee status both failed.

Legal authorities cited

Unite the Union v Nailard [2017] ICR 121Chandhok v Tirkey [2015] ICR 527Halawi v WDFG UK Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1387Groom v Maritime Coastguard Agency [2024] EAT 71Lawson v Serco [2006] UKHL 3Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing & Services Ltd [2012] UKSC 1Hottak v SSHD [2016] EWCA Civ 438Dhunna v Creditsights Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1238Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41Grayson v Citizens Advice Bureau [2012] UKEAT 0451/11/RNMingeley v Pennock [2004] EWCA Civ 328Jivraj v Hashwani [2011] UKSC 40

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.230Equality Act 2010 s.83Equality Act 2010 s.26Equality Act 2010 s.13

Case details

Case number
4106045/2024
Decision date
4 May 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
HopeFull (SCIO) (Charity No SCO49842)
Sector
charity
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Volunteer
Service
2 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →