Sholl v The Parochial Church Council of the Parish Church of St Michael and All Angels & Anor (unfair dismissal : breach of contract : annual leave pay) [2011] UKET 2330072/2010 (30 March 2011)

Sholl v The Parochial Church Council of the Parish Church of St Michael and All Angels & Anor (unfair dismissal : breach of contract : annual leave pay) [2011] UKET 2330072/2010 (30 March 2011)

The claimant was an employee of both respondents at the material times within the meaning of section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The factors in favour of employee status, including personal service, control, mutuality of obligations, and the nature of remuneration, outweighed those against, such as the label of self-employment and responsibility for tax and National Insurance.

Citation
[2011] UKET 2330072/2010
Parties
Claimant: Dr Robert Sholl; First Respondent: The Parochial Church Council of the Parish Church of St Michael and All Angels with St James, Croydon; Second Respondent: The Vicar of the Parish Church of St Michael and all Angels with St James, Croydon (Father Donald Minchew)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
30 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Pre Hearing Review
Outcome
Claimant found to be an employee of both respondents for the purposes of unfair dismissal claim.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Employment Status, Contract of Employment, Personal Service, Control, Mutuality of Obligation
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Employment Status Contract of Employment Personal Service Control Mutuality of Obligation

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Robert Sholl

Claimant

The Parochial Church Council of the Parish Church of St Michael and All Angels with St James, Croydon

First Respondent

The Vicar of the Parish Church of St Michael and all Angels with St James, Croydon (Father Donald Minchew)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Pre Hearing Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was an employee of the respondents within the meaning of section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was an employee of both respondents at the material times within the meaning of section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The factors in favour of employee status, including personal service, control, mutuality of obligations, and the nature of remuneration, outweighed those against, such as the label of self-employment and responsibility for tax and National Insurance.

Court Disposition

Claimant found to be an employee of both respondents for the purposes of unfair dismissal claim.

Orders

  • Matter to proceed to a full merits hearing.