Emerging Markets Partnership (Europe) Ltd v Bachnak

Emerging Markets Partnership (Europe) Ltd v Bachnak

The employment tribunal erred in law by failing to consider the combined effect of the two contemporaneous agreements and the surrounding circumstances. The absence of express remuneration in the employment contract did not preclude the existence of a contract of service. The matter must be remitted for proper...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Emerging Markets Partnership (Europe) Ltd; Respondent: Bachnak
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Employment Status, Contract of Service Vs Contract for Services, Consideration, Mutuality of Obligation, Remission to Tribunal
Employment Law Contract Law Employment Status Contract of Service Vs Contract for Services Consideration Mutuality of Obligation Remission to Tribunal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Emerging Markets Partnership (Europe) Ltd

Appellant

Bachnak

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Bachnak was an employee of EMPEL within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the two agreements entered into on 23 October 2000 constituted a contract of service
  3. 3 Whether absence of express remuneration in the employment contract was fatal to its validity

Ratio Decidendi

The employment tribunal erred in law by failing to consider the combined effect of the two contemporaneous agreements and the surrounding circumstances. The absence of express remuneration in the employment contract did not preclude the existence of a contract of service. The matter must be remitted for proper determination.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Respondent’s claim remitted to the employment tribunal for re-determination by a fresh tribunal
  • Appellant to pay the respondent’s costs