Employment status

New and updated

• Date:

  27 June 2008

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Tribunal decision that agency workers were employed by agency insufficiently reasoned

  In Consistent Group Ltd v Kalwak and others [2008] EWCA Civ 430, the Court of Appeal remitted to a fresh tribunal the issue of whether or not Polish nationals engaged by an agency to work as meat packers for a third party were employees of the agency.

• Date:

  21 March 2008

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Agency worker was not employed by end user

  In James v London Borough of Greenwich [2008] EWCA Civ 35, the Court of Appeal held that, in the absence of an express contract between an agency worker and the end user, a contract will be implied only where it is necessary to do so to give business reality to the situation.

• Date:

  15 October 2007

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case of the week: Employment status of directors and shareholders

  This week's case of the week, provided by Addleshaw Goddard, covers the employment status of directors and shareholders.

• Type:

  Contract clauses

  Contract for services for individual contractor

  Use this short-form contract when you are engaging the services of a contractor.

• Date:

  22 August 2007

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Agency workers were directly employed by agency

  In Consistent Group Ltd v Kalwak and others [2007] IRLR 560 EAT the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that polish workers recruited in Poland by the agency in question and provided with both accommodation in the UK and transport to and from work were employees of the agency. Notwithstanding express written terms to the contrary, the reality of their relationship was one of employer and employees.

• Date:

  1 May 2007

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: No employment contract between worker and end user

  In James v London Borough of Greenwich [2007] IRLR 168 EAT the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that an employment tribunal properly decided that there was no implied contract of employment between an agency worker and the end user for whom she had worked for three years.

• Date:

  11 April 2007

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  James v Redcats (Brands) Ltd

  In James v Redcats (Brands) Ltd [2007] IRLR 296 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has given guidance on the definition of a worker under the national minimum wage legislation.

• Date:

  6 March 2007

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Craigie v London Borough of Haringey

  In Craigie v London Borough of Haringey EAT/0556/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has considered when a contract of employment can be implied between an agency worker and an end user.

• Date:

  30 August 2006

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  ABC News Intercontinental Inc v Gizbert

  In ABC News Intercontinental Inc v Gizbert EAT/0160/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that there was sufficient mutuality of obligation for a contract of employment to exist where an individual had an implied duty to consider in good faith whether to accept or refuse work.

• Date:

  7 April 2006

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status/sex discrimination: Church minister was employee for sex discrimination purposes

  In Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission, the House of Lords holds that a church minister who had entered into a contract personally to execute work or labour was an "employee" for the purposes of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.