Rogers v Craigclowan School (Contract of Employment : no sub-topic) [2013] UKEAT 0027_13_1907 (19 July 2013)

Rogers v Craigclowan School (Contract of Employment : no sub-topic) [2013] UKEAT 0027_13_1907 (19 July 2013)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find, based on the evidence, that the relationship between the Claimant and Respondent lacked mutuality of obligation, sufficient control, and included a right of substitution, all of which are inconsistent with employment. No error of law or perversity was identified in the Tribunal's decision.

Citation
[2013] UKEAT 0027_13_1907
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
19 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Employment Status, Unlawful Deduction From Wages, Holiday Pay, Mutuality of Obligation, Right of Substitution, Control Test
Employment Law Employment Status Unlawful Deduction From Wages Holiday Pay Mutuality of Obligation Right of Substitution Control Test

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

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant was an employee or a self-employed contractor
  2. 2 Whether there was an unlawful deduction from wages
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in its assessment of employment status

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find, based on the evidence, that the relationship between the Claimant and Respondent lacked mutuality of obligation, sufficient control, and included a right of substitution, all of which are inconsistent with employment. No error of law or perversity was identified in the Tribunal's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed