header-logo header-logo

Appeal court rules on employee status

Legal news

A worker categorised as self-employed for tax purposes is not automatically excluded from claiming rights as an employee, the Court of Appeal has ruled.

In Payne v Enfield Technical Services Ltd; Grace v BF Components Ltd, Ray Payne and Ian Grace worked exclusively for their respective appellant companies on what they thought was a selfemployed basis. Subsequently, however, their employers indicated that they were employed. When the two men were sacked, both claimed to be employees and alleged unfair dismissal. The employment tribunals accepted that they were employees, but the companies claimed the men were precluded from making such claims since they were unable to establish a continuous period of employment of one year. Alternatively, they argued, any contract of employment that did exist could not be relied on since it was tainted with illegality on the ground that the parties had represented to the Revenue that they were self-employed for tax purposes. These arguments were accepted by the employment tribunal in Grace’s case but both the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal found that while a contract of employment could be unlawfully performed if there were misrepresentations as to the facts, an error of categorisation alone, without false representations, would not make a contract illegal.

Stephen Moore, partner at Berry Smith LLP, which acted in the case, says: “The decision means that an employee will not be precluded from claiming unfair dismissal on the ground of illegality of contract even where he had been treated as self-employed but was later found to have been employed.”

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll