Smith v Carillion (JM) Ltd & Anor (Contract of Employment : Whether established) [2014] UKEAT 0081_13_1701 (17 January 2014)

Smith v Carillion (JM) Ltd & Anor (Contract of Employment : Whether established) [2014] UKEAT 0081_13_1701 (17 January 2014)

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in holding that no contract, whether of employment or worker status, existed between the claimant and the end-user. The facts were equally explicable without the implication of a contract, and the common law principle of necessity applies. The Human Rights Act 1998 does not override this principle or require a contract to be implied in agency worker situations where domestic law would not. Protection under the relevant statutes was limited to employees at the material time, and the claimant was not an employee or worker of the end-user.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0081_13_1701
Parties
Appellant: David Smith; Respondent: Carillion (JM) Ltd; Respondent: Schal International Management Ltd; Respondent: Carillion plc
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Discrimination, Health and Safety, Trade Union Activities, Agency Worker Status, Blacklisting
Employment Law Human Rights Law Victimisation Discrimination Health and Safety Trade Union Activities Agency Worker Status Blacklisting

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Smith

Appellant

Carillion (JM) Ltd

Respondent

Schal International Management Ltd

Respondent

Carillion plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract of employment or worker contract existed between the claimant and end-user
  2. 2 Whether protection under TULR(C)A s146 and ERA s44 applies to agency workers
  3. 3 Whether Human Rights Act 1998 requires implication of a contract in agency worker situations

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in holding that no contract, whether of employment or worker status, existed between the claimant and the end-user. The facts were equally explicable without the implication of a contract, and the common law principle of necessity applies. The Human Rights Act 1998 does not override this principle or require a contract to be implied in agency worker situations where domestic law would not. Protection under the relevant statutes was limited to employees at the material time, and the claimant was not an employee or worker of the end-user.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Claims against Carillion (JM) Ltd and Schal International Management Ltd dismissed
  • Appeal against dismissal of claim against Carillion plc dismissed