''Cairns v Visteon UK Ltd'' (2006) is a

United Kingdom labour law United Kingdom labour law regulates the relations between workers, employers and trade unions. People at work in the UK can rely upon a minimum charter of employment rights, which are found in Acts of Parliament, Regulations, common law and equit ...

case, regarding the scope of protection available to

agency workers Agency worker law refers to a body of law which regulates the conduct of employment agencies and the labour law rights of people who get jobs through them. The typical situation involves the person going to an employment agency and then the employme ...

Facts

An assistant manager of 7 years with Visteon UK Ltd, Ms Cairns became an agency worker for the four most recent years through an agency named ‘MSX’. She was dismissed for allegedly falsifying her time sheets. The agency did investigations and cleared her, but Ms Cairns was not allowed back to work. The agency gave her pay in lieu of notice and redundancy. But she wanted compensation for

unfair dismissal In labour law, unfair dismissal is an act of employment termination made without good reason or contrary to the country's specific legislation. Situation per country Australia (See: '' unfair dismissal in Australia'') Australia has long-standing ...

and brought a claim to the tribunal.

Judgment

Judge Peter Clark held that Ms Cairns was not an "employee" under

ERA 1996 The Employment Rights Act 1996 (c. 18) is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament passed by the Conservative government to codify existing law on individual rights in UK labour law. History Previous statutes, dating from the Contracts of Employment ...

s 230, and therefore could not bring an unfair dismissal claim. Doubting dicta in ''

Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd ''Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd'' 004EWCA Civ 217UK labour law">is a UK labour law case, concerning the employment rights of agency workers. Facts Patricia Dacas had worked for Wandsworth LBC (on assignment through Brook Street plc) as ...

'' by Sedley LJ he insisted there was different policy behind ERA 1996 Part 10 to that of tort law, and there was "no good policy reason for extending that protection to a second parallel employer." 007ICR 616, 7/ref>

References

{{Reflist Employment Appeal Tribunal cases 2006 in British case law