EAT Contract of Employment : Whether Established – The Claimants were engaged by the Respondent as caretaker/manager of a house and small farm estate, responsible for undertaking duties which included what might be described as estate management together with maintenance of the house and grounds, including housekeeping. The written agreement was avowedly an agreement to employ them. The ET held that they were workers, not employees, because the Respondent did not have sufficient control, having divested itself of day to day control.
Held: the ET erred in law. The true question for the ET was whether the Respondent retained a sufficient right of control, not whether it exercised day to day control. Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Limited v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497 discussed and applied. The Respondent retained a sufficient right of control: the Claimants were employees.
David Richardson J
[2013] UKEAT 0177 – 12 – 2301
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Ready Mixed Concrete Southeast Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance QBD 8-Dec-1967
Contracts of service or for services
In three cases appeals were heard against a finding as to whether a worker was entitled to have his employer pay National Insurance contributions on his behalf which would apply if he were an employee. He worked as an ‘owner-driver’
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.470642