Flett v Matheson

The Court held that the ILP and associated arrangements had the essential features of a contract of apprenticeship, and the employer's obligations extended for the training period specified, subject to limited exceptions. The case was remitted for further fact-finding to determine the precise terms and remedies.

Parties: Appellant: Liam Flett; Respondent: Sharney Matheson
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 February 2006
Procedural Posture: Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome: Appeal allowed to the extent indicated; case remitted for further fact-finding.
Legal Topics: Contract of Apprenticeship, Modern Apprenticeship, Employment Contract, Damages for Wrongful Dismissal

Employment Law Contract of Apprenticeship Modern Apprenticeship Employment Contract Damages for Wrongful Dismissal

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Liam Flett

Appellant

Sharney Matheson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the tripartite Individual Learning Plan (ILP) constituted a contract of apprenticeship or a contract of employment
2 What obligations the employer owed under the ILP and associated training schemes
3 Whether the appellant was entitled to damages beyond one week's wages

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent indicated; case remitted for further fact-finding.

Orders

Remission to the Employment Tribunal for further consideration of the evidence and findings of fact.
Appellant to be mindful of the difficulty of proving substantial damages.