Community Based Care Health Ltd v Narayan UKEAT/0162/18/JOJ
Appeal against the ET’s decision that the Claimant was a “worker” within s 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996 (“ERA”) and was not an “employee” under s 230(1) ERA. Appeal dismissed.
The Claimant was one of a number of doctors providing out-of-hours services who worked in, through or for the Respondent, which provided the services of NHS GPs. The Claimant worked regular shifts on a 12-week rota, normally following a set shift pattern. She was not obliged to accept work and the Respondent was not obliged to provide any. She took holidays when she pleased, after warning the Respondent. In October 2015, on advice from her accountant, the Claimant set up a company, to which payments were made by the Respondent from that date. When a dispute arose, and the Respondent ceased to offer her further work, the Claimant presented claims to the ET including unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unpaid holiday pay. The ET concluded that the Claimant was a worker for, but not an employee of, the Respondent. The Respondent appealed on the grounds that the ET had erred in law (1) by concluding that after October 2015 the Respondent's contractual relations were with the Claimant and not the company, (2) by failing to consider and apply the decision of Suhail v Herts Urgent Care UKEAT/0416/11, and (3) by concluding that the Claimant was an integral part of the operations of the Respondent.
The EAT held that the three grounds of appeal were not persuasive and disclosed no error of law.
Published: 11/09/2019 10:52