Varley v. Gill [2001] UKEAT 1456_00_1212 (12 December 2001)

Varley v. Gill [2001] UKEAT 1456_00_1212 (12 December 2001)

It is arguable that the Employment Tribunal erred in finding Mr Varley personally liable for the debt, as evidence suggests the true debtor may have been Protea Personal Productivity Limited, not Mr Varley individually.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 1456_00_1212
Parties
Appellant: Mr Varley; Respondent: Mr Gill
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal permitted to proceed to full hearing on the issue of true debtor.
Legal Topics
Worker Status, Personal Liability, Company Liability, Breach of Contract
Employment Law Worker Status Personal Liability Company Liability Breach of Contract

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Varley

Appellant

Mr Gill

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Gill was a worker or employee under Section 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether Mr Varley was personally liable for the debt or if the liability rested with Protea Personal Productivity Limited

Ratio Decidendi

It is arguable that the Employment Tribunal erred in finding Mr Varley personally liable for the debt, as evidence suggests the true debtor may have been Protea Personal Productivity Limited, not Mr Varley individually.

Court Disposition

Appeal permitted to proceed to full hearing on the issue of true debtor.

Orders

  • Mr Varley to produce a copy of Mr Gill's contract within 14 days to the Employment Appeal Tribunal and Mr Gill.
  • Usual directions as to skeleton arguments apply.