Pimlico Plumbers Ltd & Anor v Smith

Pimlico Plumbers Ltd & Anor v Smith

Mr Smith was a 'worker' within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and his working situation fell within the definition of 'employment' in section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act 2010. The contractual documents and practical reality required personal service, there was no unfettered right of substitution, and the Manual imposed a minimum hours requirement. The relationship was not one of independent contractor and client/customer but of a worker integrated into the business of the appellants.

Parties
Appellant: Pimlico Plumbers Limited; Appellant: Charlie Mullins; Respondent: Gary Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Worker Status, Employment Rights, Personal Service, Contractual Obligations, Mutuality of Obligation, Restrictive Covenants, Unfair Dismissal, Disability Discrimination, Holiday Pay, Working Time Regulations
Employment Law Labour Law Discrimination Law Worker Status Employment Rights Personal Service Contractual Obligations Mutuality of Obligation +5 more

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pimlico Plumbers Limited

Appellant

Charlie Mullins

Appellant

Gary Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Smith was a 'worker' under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998
  2. 2 Whether Mr Smith's working situation fell within the definition of 'employment' in section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Whether the contractual relationship was one of client/customer and independent contractor or principal and worker

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Smith was a 'worker' within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and his working situation fell within the definition of 'employment' in section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act 2010. The contractual documents and practical reality required personal service, there was no unfettered right of substitution, and the Manual imposed a minimum hours requirement. The relationship was not one of independent contractor and client/customer but of a worker integrated into the business of the appellants.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by Pimlico Plumbers Limited and Charlie Mullins is dismissed.