Employment status

New and updated

• Date:

  7 February 2006

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up: Employment status

  This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering employment status.

• Date:

  24 June 2005

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Agency workers: Agency worker not employee of agency or end-user

  In Bunce v Postworth Ltd (t/a Skyblue), the Court of Appeal holds that, in certain circumstances, there may be an umbrella agreement governing the relationship between a worker and an employment agency, alongside individual, separate contracts in respect of specific assignments for the agency's clients.

• Date:

  31 December 2004

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Usetech Ltd v Young (Inspector of Taxes)

  In Usetech Ltd v Young (Inspector of Taxes) [2004] EWHC 2248 HC, the High Court found that where an individual provided his services through his own service company and an agency all the contracts were subsumed into one. The relevant terms identified and transferred to the notional contract between the individual and the hirer were consistent with those of an employment contract.

• Date:

  1 November 2004

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Soteriou v Ultrachem Ltd and others

  In Soteriou v Ultrachem Ltd and others [2004] IRLR 870 HC, the High Court held that the EAT had not erred in striking out the applicant's claim for wrongful dismissal on the basis that an employment tribunal had already determined on a claim for unfair dismissal that the applicant's contract of employment was unenforceable due to illegality and that, since the claim for wrongful dismissal involved the same contract, the EAT was bound by that finding.

• Date:

  1 July 2004

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Volunteers not "employees"

  Voluntary workers were not "employees" as defined in s.68 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, holds the EAT in South East Sheffield Citizens Advice Bureau v Grayson (17 November 2003).

• Date:

  7 May 2004

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status/agency worker: Worker not employee of agency

  In Brook Street (UK) Ltd v Dacas, the Court of Appeal holds that where an agency's obligations to a worker (who provides his or her services to an end-user) do not extend to an obligation to continue providing that worker with work, and where that worker is under no obligation to continue working or to accept any placement offered to them by the agency, there can be no mutuality of obligations between those parties.

• Date:

  18 July 2003

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Employee status to be determined from full consideration of evidence

  In Franks v Reuters Ltd and another, the Court of Appeal holds that in determining an individual's employment status, an employment tribunal should consider, not only any relevant documents, but also all the relevant evidence about the dynamics of the work relationship between the parties, and make clear and comprehensive findings of fact on this evidence.

• Date:

  23 May 2003

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Agency worker was an employee

  In Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd and another, the EAT holds that an employment tribunal erred in law when it found an agency worker not to be an employee of the agency during the course of an individual assignment, in circumstances where an application of the test of the two minimum requirements of the degree of control and mutuality of obligations pointed overwhelmingly towards the existence of a contract of employment.

• Date:

  10 January 2003

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Illegal contracts: Employee's participation in tax fraud rendered contract illegal

  In Soteriou v Ultrachem, Solvo Ltd and Ultracolour Ltd, the EAT upholds an employment tribunal's decision that an employee's knowing and active participation in the deception of the tax authorities as to his employment status was primarily for his own benefit.

• Date:

  9 December 2002

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employment status: Agency worker was not client company's employee

  The EAT holds in Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v (1) Jarvis and others (2) Brentvine Ltd that an employment tribunal which expressly found that there was no contract, either written or oral, between a client company and a worker supplied to it by an employment agency, erred in law in going on to rule that the existence of factors consistent with a contract of employment subsisting, and the fact that the worker had worked continuously for the client company for nine years, made her an employee of the client company.