CNN Loses Appeal Over Tribunal Jurisdiction in Bhatti Employment Case
Cable News International (CNN) has lost its appeal against an Employment Tribunal's decision to hear Saima Bhatti's claims, including discrimination and unfair dismissal. The EAT upheld the original ruling.
• public
CNN's Appeal Over UK Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction Dismissed
Cable News International (CNN) has failed in its appeal against an Employment Tribunal decision that it has jurisdiction to hear claims brought by former journalist, Ms Saima Bhatti.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld the original tribunal's ruling that Ms Bhatti's claims of discrimination, victimisation, unfair dismissal, equal pay, and outstanding holiday pay are justiciable in England and Wales for alleged wrongs committed on or after 1 March 2017.
Background of the Case
Ms Bhatti, a British citizen of Pakistani heritage, was employed by CNN from 2013 to 2017. Her contract, governed by Georgian (USA) law, involved assignments primarily in Asia. In March 2017, she returned to London, seeking to be based there while recovering from a foot injury. CNN declined this request and subsequently dismissed her in August 2017 at their London subsidiary.
Key Legal Issues
The core of the appeal centred on whether Ms Bhatti's employment had a sufficient connection to Great Britain to fall within the scope of UK employment legislation. CNN argued that the Employment Tribunal lacked both territorial and international jurisdiction.
The EAT Judge, Mr Justice Kerr, ruled that the initial judge had not erred. The EAT agreed that from 1 March 2017, London had become Ms Bhatti’s primary work base, superseding Bangkok. This was based on an evaluation of evidence, including Ms Bhatti's presence in London for medical treatment and her attempts to secure a permanent role at the London bureau.
International Jurisdiction and the Brussels Regulation
CNN also argued that the Brussels Regulation (EU No. 1215/2012) should have prevented the UK tribunal from asserting jurisdiction. The EAT rejected this, noting that the Regulation doesn't give a non-EU domiciled defendant the right to be sued in its country of domicile. The EAT further found that Ms Bhatti could proceed in London because she last habitually worked there and because the dispute arose out of the operations of CNN's London subsidiary.
Service of Claim Documents
The EAT also dismissed CNN's argument that the claim documents were not properly served. The documents were sent to CNN's London subsidiary, which brought them to the attention of the headquarters. The EAT found that this was sufficient under the tribunal's procedural rules.
Outcome
The appeal was dismissed, meaning Ms Bhatti's claims can now proceed to a full hearing on their merits.
Read the entire judgement here: Cable News International INC v Ms Saima Bhatti [2025] EAT 63
