High Table Ltd v Horst and others [1997] IRLR 513 (CA)

Facts

Mrs. Christine Horst and two other employees claimed unfair dismissal after being laid off and not applying for new High Table Ltd. jobs. High Table Ltd. claimed they were fired because their City firm Hill Samuel worksite, which was normally from 10am to 4pm, no longer needed their ‘silver service’ waitressing after the supply contract was renegotiated the year before. She said she was not redundant since the labour handbook permitted her to be moved ‘within reasonable daily driving distance’ when possible. The Tribunal found her role unnecessary and the employers were being fair. She appealed, saying the mobility clause permitted her to work wherever in the City, therefore employee standards had not changed. Her employer did not give redundancy.

Held

She was deemed redundant by Peter Gibson LJ because, for purposes of redundancy, her place of employment was Hill Samuel, not the City as a whole. Bass Leisure Ltd v Thomas [1994] IRLR 104 was cited. According to ERA 1996 section 139, the place of employment

"is to be established by factual enquiry, taking into account the employee's fixed or changing place or places of work and any contractual terms which go to evidence or define the place of employment and its extent, but not those (if any) which make provision for the employee to be transferred to another," .