Hudson Contract Services Ltd v The Construction Industry Training Board

Hudson Contract Services Ltd v The Construction Industry Training Board

Hudson is an employer in the construction industry because it performs construction activities through its statutory employees (self-employed operatives), and its head office is a construction establishment from which these activities take place. The statutory framework requires levy to be imposed on employers benefiting from a trained workforce, regardless of direct employment or risk. Article 5(4) does not transfer employer status to Hudson's clients for levy purposes.

Parties
Appellant: Hudson Contract Services Limited; Respondent: The Construction Industry Training Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Industrial Training Levy, Employment Status, Construction Industry, Assessment of Levy
Tax Law Employment Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Industrial Training Levy Employment Status Construction Industry Assessment of Levy

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hudson Contract Services Limited

Appellant

The Construction Industry Training Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Hudson is an employer in the construction industry for purposes of the Industrial Training Act 1982 and the 2015 Order
  2. 2 Whether Hudson operates a construction establishment engaged wholly or mainly in the construction industry
  3. 3 Proper interpretation and application of article 5(4) of the 2015 Order

Ratio Decidendi

Hudson is an employer in the construction industry because it performs construction activities through its statutory employees (self-employed operatives), and its head office is a construction establishment from which these activities take place. The statutory framework requires levy to be imposed on employers benefiting from a trained workforce, regardless of direct employment or risk. Article 5(4) does not transfer employer status to Hudson's clients for levy purposes.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The assessment to levy made by the Board against Hudson in respect of the third levy period stands