Probationary Periods – Importance of Dates when Considering Extensions

Published: 5 Aug 2019
Type: Insight

First Published in The Bermuda Chamber Of Commerce Newsletter (Chamber Insider), August 2019

New employment is not always a smooth process. The employer and employee both need to adjust to new conditions and dynamics. Employees must learn new duties and methods of operation, while employers must learn the work habits, strengths and weaknesses of the new employee. Probationary periods are helpful to both parties as a ‘getting to know you’ phase in what most hope to be a mutually beneficial relationship. However, no relationship is perfect.

In Jerome Robinson (1609 VIP Executive Limited) and Kaenori Burchall (Robinson v Burchall): Burchall brought claims for being unfairly dismissed. Robinson defended citing the authority to dismiss an employee for any reason during the probation period. The Hon. Assistant Justice Pettingill (Pettingill AJ) noted that “if the end of the contractual probation period is approaching and an employer is not yet sure whether to dismiss the employee or not, the probation period can be extended if the contract includes an express right for the employer to do so or if the employee agrees to an extension.” Probation periods can be extended if an employer believes an employee has not reached a satisfactory threshold. Ultimately though, under Bermuda law, an “employer is legally entitled to terminate the contract of employment for any reason without notice in accordance with section 19 of the Employment Act 2000 (Act). But what an employer cannot do is extend the probationary period after the initial probation has expired.

In Robinson v Burchall, Pettingill AJ stated that “the law on probationary periods is quite clear…and an employee cannot be placed on a probation period once an initial period has expired, which was for a month in this instance, without the employer giving prior notice of the intention to extend the probation, even in circumstances where such period is agreed as it was in this case…. s.19 in setting out probation for a “new employee” does not give statutory flexibility to reinstate a period of probation at a later date in time as a convenience to the employer. The reason being obvious as it would give a “license” to employers to impose a probationary period as they wished and obviate the more stringent provisions of the Employment Act required for full time employees.” If the employer fails to exercise any right to extend the probation period before its expiration, the employee automatically passes the probation and can no longer be dismissed without cause.

Pettingill AJ ruled that, as Ms. Burchall was not terminated on any of the grounds for unfair dismissal noted in s. 28 of the Act, and was in fact summarily dismissed by s.19, the termination was ‘wrongful’ “as she was a de-facto employee and should have been given a written warning and appropriate notice in accordance with s.24 and s.27 of the Act if there were issues with her conduct.”

Robinson v Burchall is a cautionary tale for both employers and employees when it comes to managing probationary periods. We would always advise that an employer should take care when considering extending an employee’s probationary period. If there is any doubt, then advice should be sought prior to the probationary period expiring.

Share
More publications
Economic Substance
27 Apr 2026

Economic substance regime now falls under Cita

Recent amendments to Bermuda’s economic substance regime have transferred regulatory responsibility from the Registrar of Companies to the Corporate Income Tax Agency.

Appleby-Website-Private-Client-and-Trusts-Practice
22 Apr 2026

Regulation, Regulation, Regulation

The article discusses updates to global trust guidance and regulation, as well as beneficial ownership and the regulatory burden on trustees that comes with increased transparency.

Appleby-Website-Private-Client-and-Trusts-Practice-1905px-x-1400px
15 Apr 2026

Purpose trusts: Bermuda’s answer to modern asset structuring

Purpose trusts represent a notable development in modern trust law, particularly within offshore financial jurisdictions such as Bermuda. Unlike traditional private trusts, which are established for the benefit of identifiable beneficiaries, purpose trusts are created to achieve specific objectives or purposes. Historically, common law jurisdictions were reluctant to recognise such arrangements due to the absence of beneficiaries capable of enforcing the trust. However, legislative reforms in Bermuda have significantly expanded the scope of trust law by expressly validating noncharitable purpose trusts. Through the enactment of the Trusts (Special Provisions) Act 1989 (‘the 1989 Act’), Bermuda introduced a statutory framework that allows trusts to exist for defined purposes, provided certain legal requirements are satisfied. This innovation has made Bermuda a leading jurisdiction for the establishment of purpose trusts, particularly in the fields of international finance, corporate structuring and private wealth management. This article examines the legal foundations of purpose trusts under Bermuda law, focusing on their historical development, statutory framework, requirements for validity, enforcement mechanisms and practical applications.

Website-Code-Bermuda-1
10 Apr 2026

Bermuda Regulatory Update – Economic Substance Amendment Act 2026

On 31 March 2026, the Economic Substance Amendment Act 2026 and the Economic Substance Amendment Regulations 2026 (together, the “2026 Amendments”) came into force, enacting changes to the Economic Substance Act 2018 (“ES Act”) and Economic Substance Regulations 2018.

ICLG Fintech 21 cover
10 Apr 2026

Digital asset developments and Bermuda’s regulatory readiness

While frightening to some, “finance bros” and “tech bros” are now wearing the same gilets as traditional finance products and structures are being infused with digital asset adaptation.

Appleby-Website-Insurance-and-Reinsurance
1 Apr 2026

Q1’26 Suggests Cat Bond Issuance Could Reach $20bn Again, Private ILS & Sidecar Surge to Continue

It’s been an exceptionally busy start to the year for the catastrophe bond sector, with Q1’26 officially becoming the second highest Q1 on record in terms of total catastrophe bond issuance, which indicates that 2026 could end up reaching the $20 billion+ milestone once again, Brad Adderley, Managing Partner at law firm Appleby has said.

Trust Disputes
27 Mar 2026

Privy Council decision in X Trusts – redefining the role of the protector

On 19 March 2026, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) delivered its long-awaited judgment regarding the role of a fiduciary protector in the administration of a trust (A and 6 others (Appellants) v C and 13 others (Respondents) [2026] UKPC 11, on appeal from the Court of Appeal of Bermuda). The decision of the JCPC was unanimous, with the judgment being given by Lords Briggs and Richards.

Appleby-Website-Insurance-and-Reinsurance
26 Mar 2026

Latin American risks and the Bermuda market

Bermuda’s decades-long efforts to welcome Latin American risks to the island’s re/insurance market have borne fruit in the form of the many LatAm captive insurers that have become domiciled here.

Appleby-Website-Insurance-and-Reinsurance
24 Mar 2026

Navigating Bermuda’s New Recovery Planning Requirements: A Roadmap for Commercial Insurers

On 20 March 2026, the Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA) issued an updated Guidance Note for Recovery Planning Requirements (Guidance Note). The Guidance Note assists Bermuda commercial insurers’ compliance with the obligations set out in the Insurance (Prudential Standards) (Recovery Plan) Rules 2024 (Rules), which became operative on 1 May 2025.