Community Based Care Health Ltd v Narayan [2019] UKEAT 0162_18_0209 (2 September 2019)

Community Based Care Health Ltd v Narayan [2019] UKEAT 0162_18_0209 (2 September 2019)

The claimant was a worker under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and in employment under section 83(2) of the Equality Act 2010; the contractual relationship remained with the claimant despite payments to her company; the undisclosed principal doctrine did not apply due to the nature of the work...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] UKEAT 0162_18_0209
Parties
Claimant: Ms Narayan; Claimant's Company: RNJ Medical Services Ltd; Respondent: Respondent Company (NHS GP Service Provider)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
02 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Worker Status, Employment Contract, Mutuality of Obligation, Undisclosed Principal Doctrine, Integration Into Organisation
Employment Law Equality Law Worker Status Employment Contract Mutuality of Obligation Undisclosed Principal Doctrine Integration Into Organisation

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Narayan

Claimant

RNJ Medical Services Ltd

Claimant's Company

Respondent Company (NHS GP Service Provider)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant was a 'worker' under section 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether claimant was in 'employment' under section 83(2) Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Effect of payments to claimant's company on contractual relationship

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was a worker under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and in employment under section 83(2) of the Equality Act 2010; the contractual relationship remained with the claimant despite payments to her company; the undisclosed principal doctrine did not apply due to the nature of the work and requirements for personal performance; factual distinctions from Suhail v. Herts Urgent Care justified a different outcome.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judge's decision affirmed
  • Consequences of decision to be worked out by parties or at further hearing