The Claimants were foster carers under a new model of foster care, whereby they received both a "professional fee" in return for a full-time commitment and not being in any other paid employment, and also a separate foster allowance if a child was placed with them. The Council argued that the role of a foster carer was statutory (under the Looked After Children (Scotland) Regulations 2009) and non-contractual, but the ET found that the relationship between the Claimants and the Council was contractual in nature. The Council appealed.

The EAT held that the ET had not erred in concluding that, under this model of foster care, the arrangement contained all the elements of a contract of employment, since the Claimants were being paid for their services and were subject to the control of the Council. However, the EAT made it clear that the circumstances in this case differed from the so-called "ordinary" foster care arrangement, where no fee or salary is provided.