In this case the Tribunal held that the Claimant was not the employee of the Respondent. It considered that while the tests in Ready Mix Concrete (South East) Limited v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497 were largely satisfied the Respondent did not possess a sufficient degree of control over the Claimant to constitute him an employee of the Respondent. There was no written contract of employment that specified the rights and obligations of the parties. The Claimant appealed arguing that the facts found by the Tribunal implied that the Respondent had ultimate control of the Claimant and that the Tribunal had misdirected itself by focussing on whether the Claimant in fact acted independently. It was submitted that the true question was whether the facts and circumstances showed that the Respondent had the ultimate right to control the Claimant. Held (1) that there were insufficient facts found proved by the Tribunal from which it could be implied that the Respondent had retained ultimate control of the Claimant and was therefore an employee of the Respondent; (2) that the Tribunal had found that the degree of control exercised by the Respondent was insufficient to imply that the Respondent had ultimate control or such a degree of control as warranted a finding that the Claimant was an employee of the Respondent; and that there was an insufficient basis for holding that the Tribunal had erred in law.
Lord Summers
[2020] UKEAT 0010 – 19 – 1908
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 04 December 2021; Ref: scu.653917
