Gunny v Great Ormond Street for Children NHS Foundation Trust & Ors UKEAT/0241/17/DA
Appeal against a finding that the Claimant was not employed by the Second Respondent. Appeal dismissed.
The Claimant and a colleague are consultant neuroradiologists employed by the First Respondent at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust (described as the 'day job' by the ET). Both doctors undertook private work for other hospitals. They were part of a group of consultant neuroradiologists, which provided services to the Second Respondent, HCA International ("HCA") pursuant to a written agreement between HCA and the group. On 1 July 2016, the 2015 agreement was terminated. The Claimant claimed that a new agreement was formed comprising either male doctors or female doctors without children. The Claimant claimed that as a female doctor with children, she was unlawfully excluded from the group. The questions before the ET were: (1) Were the contracts entered into by the Claimant and her colleague as individuals personally to do work? and (2) If they were, were the individuals "employed under" those contracts? The ET ruled that there was an unfettered right to substitute within the group and she was not employed by the Second Respondent. The Claimant appealed.
The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET decided that the Claimant was not in employment in the extended sense. That conclusion was reached not just on the basis that the Claimant was party to a "group contract" but on all the circumstances relevant to the issue.
Published: 14/06/2018 16:41