header-logo header-logo

Status symbol

04 July 2014 / Tim Leaver , Nick Wright
Issue: 7613 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
employmet_leaverwright

Tim Leaver & Nick Wright report on clarification from the Supreme Court that LLP members are workers

Employment law distinguishes between “employees” and “workers”, conferring extensive rights on employees (including the right to not be unfairly dismissed) but far fewer rights on workers. Generally, self-employed people who are in business on their own account and undertake work for their clients or customers fall within neither category, have no specific employment law rights and must instead rely on general statutes (eg in respect of health and safety) and common law rights in contract and tort to protect themselves when going about their business. In some cases, however, self-employed people will be considered to be “workers”. The question for the Supreme Court (SC) in Clyde & Co LLP and another v Bates van Winkelhof [2014] UKSC 32, [2014] All ER (D) 173 (May) was whether LLP members can claim this status.

Section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) sets out the definition of a “worker”. The first limb of that section

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll