EAT Jurisdictional Points : Worker, Employee or Neither – The Claimant worked almost exclusively for the Respondent for many years unloading pallets of plasterboard and doing general work on site. He was a self-employed sub-contractor with a CIS card. There was no obligation on him to accept work when offered and no obligation on the Respondent to offer him work. It was argued that there was no mutuality sufficient to found worker status, and there were subsidiary arguments as to control, right to use a substitute and degree of integration in the workforce. Held – appeal dismissed. The necessary mutuality existed while the Claimant was working for the Respondent: James v Redcats (Brands) Limited [2007] IRLR 296 considered and applied. There was no error of law in respect of Employment Judge’s approach to the questions of control, substitute and degree of integration.
Cotswold Developments Construction Limited v Williams [2006] IRLR 181, Byrne Brothers (Formwork) Ltd v Baird and Ors [2002] IRLR 96 and Clyde and Co LLP and another v Bates van Winkelhof [2014] UKSC 32 considered and applied.
David Richardson J
[2014] UKEAT 0074 – 14 – 0707
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536691