Remote Work from Abroad and UK Employment Law

The case of Iryna Malyk v Teleperformance Contact Ltd highlights an increasingly common issue for remote workers: can an employee work from another country if their employment contract is based in the UK?

In June 2026, the Bristol Employment Tribunal dismissed Ms Malyk’s claim for unfair dismissal, finding that the employer was entitled to end her employment when she relocated to France and continued working remotely from abroad.

Background: Remote Work, Relocation and a Dispute About Place of Work

Iryna Malyk worked as a Regional Finance Business Partner. Her contract allowed her to work from home in Bristol, with occasional visits to the office. After the office closed, she worked fully remotely.

In 2024, her husband obtained a job in France. Ms Malyk informed her employer that she planned to relocate and continue working remotely from France. The company refused, citing legal and tax implications. They issued a reasonable management instruction requiring her to carry out her duties from within the UK.

Despite this, Ms Malyk moved to France and continued working remotely.

Why the Employer Won: Key Tribunal Findings

1. The employment contract required work from home in the UK — not “anywhere in the world”

Although the contract did not explicitly ban working from abroad, the Tribunal found that:

• both the employee’s and employer’s addresses were in Bristol,

• the role was defined as “home office” work in the UK,

• the contract relied entirely on UK employment law,

• employment was conditional on the right to work in the UK.

Together, these meant the contract implicitly and expressly required work to be performed from the UK.

2. The employer had legitimate reasons to refuse remote work from another country

The company argued that:

• working from France on a UK contract could breach French employment law,

• it could create tax and social security obligations,

• cross‑border employment would require a local French contract, which the company could not offer.

The Tribunal accepted these reasons as “substantial”, meaning serious enough to justify dismissal.

3. Refusal to follow a reasonable instruction justified ending the employment

Ms Malyk was clearly instructed to work from the UK. She continued working from France regardless.

In these circumstances, the employer acted within the law, and dismissal fell within the “range of reasonable responses” available to a reasonable employer.

What This Case Means for Employees in the UK

1. Remote work does not automatically mean you can work from any country

Even if a contract says “home office”, this usually means a home in the UK, unless the contract explicitly allows international remote work.

2. Employers can refuse cross‑border remote work for legal and tax reasons

Companies must comply with local laws relating to:

• tax,

• social security,

• work permits,

• employer obligations in the host country.

3. Moving abroad without employer approval can lead to dismissal

Even if the job is fully remote, the contract terms and legal risks for the employer are decisive.

What Employers Should Take Away from This Case

• Employment contracts should clearly state whether remote work from abroad is permitted.

• Companies should have a cross‑border remote work policy.

• Employers should respond promptly when an employee indicates plans to relocate.

Summary

The case of Iryna Malyk shows that in the UK, remote work does not give employees an automatic right to work from another country. If a contract is governed by UK law and specifies home‑based work in the UK, the employee must work from within the UK unless the employer agrees otherwise.

The Tribunal confirmed that an employer may lawfully end employment if an employee relocates abroad against a clear instruction — even if the role is fully remote.

Join the mailing list to receive legal updates: https://www.martainkin.co.uk/legal-updates