Giannelli v Edmund Bell & Co Ltd [2005] UKEAT 0192_05_0609 (6 September 2005)

Giannelli v Edmund Bell & Co Ltd [2005] UKEAT 0192_05_0609 (6 September 2005)

The Tribunal failed to properly analyse the agency agreement and its variation, particularly the retainer and exclusivity imposed in 1999, which may have affected the assessment of dependency and control. This error necessitates remitting the case for rehearing.

Citation
[2005] UKEAT 0192_05_0609
Parties
Appellant Advocate: Miss Melanie Tether; Appellant Instructing Solicitor: Messrs Thompsons Solicitors; Respondent Advocate: Mr Paul Wilson; Respondent Instructing Solicitor: Andrew Holland Law
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing
Legal Topics
Worker Status, Unlawful Deduction From Wages, Business Undertaking, Agency Agreement, Economic Dependence
Employment Law Worker Status Unlawful Deduction From Wages Business Undertaking Agency Agreement Economic Dependence

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Melanie Tether

Appellant Advocate

Messrs Thompsons Solicitors

Appellant Instructing Solicitor

Mr Paul Wilson

Respondent Advocate

Andrew Holland Law

Respondent Instructing Solicitor

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was a 'worker' under s.230(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was a client or customer of a business undertaking carried on by the appellant
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal properly considered the agency agreement and subsequent variation

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal failed to properly analyse the agency agreement and its variation, particularly the retainer and exclusivity imposed in 1999, which may have affected the assessment of dependency and control. This error necessitates remitting the case for rehearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing

Orders

  • Case remitted to a fresh tribunal for rehearing