A stipendiary lay reader claimed for unfair dismissal. The respondent denied there was any contract of service.
Held: The Tribunal rejected a submission that the claimant was an office holder and, as such, that it followed he was not employed under a contract of service: ‘Merely to say that someone holds an office does not seem to us to decide the question which has to be decided under [the 1974 Act]. Some office holders may well not be employed under a contract of service. It does not follow that an office holder cannot be employed under a contract of service. The question . . is whether the office he holds is one the appointment to which is made by, or is co-existent with, a contract of service. If it is, then he is entitled to the protection of the Act of 1974.’ and ‘It may be difficult to establish who is the other contracting party, but we are not satisfied that clergy when working within the framework of the Church cannot be engaged under a contract. It may well be that the contract, if it exists, is for services rather than of service.’
Judges:
Slynn J
Citations:
[1979] ICR 900
Statutes:
Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974
Cited by:
Cited – Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission HL 15-Dec-2005
The claimant appealed after her claim for sex discrimination had failed. She had been dismissed from her position an associate minister of the church. The court had found that it had no jurisdiction, saying that her appointment was not an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.236485
