In proceedings before the ET, the ET concluded that the Claimant was a "limb (b)" worker for the purposes of employment legislation (and so was able to claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay and unlawful deduction of wages), but it also found that he was not an employee (and so could not bring claims for unfair dismissal or wrongful dismissal). The Respondent appealed on the ground that the ET's judgment contained a fundamental contradiction.

The EAT held that the ET's judgment was flawed and the appeal would be allowed. Rather than having a new hearing from scratch, the matter would proceed, on the basis of the primary facts found by the original ET, at a further hearing before a fresh ET.