Autoclenz v Belcher (2011)

Frage	Antworten
Facts	D provided car cleaning services to depots and 'contracted' C’s to worked as valets at one depot Contracts provided that C’s would: (i) be self-employed; (ii) pay own NI contributions; (iii) would not become D’s employees. D requires C’s to sign new contracts which provided: (i) the relationship between D and C’s was that of client and independent contractor; (ii) C’s could engage other persons to work on their behalf; (iii) C’s were free to refuse any work provided by D; (iv) D was not bound to provide work
What actually happened?	BUT 1. D told C’s how to carry out work 2. D provided cleaning materials 3. D determined rate of pay 4. D required C’s to provide prior notification if they were unable to work. C’s argue that they were employees.
Ruling	Per Lord Clarke at [35]: “whether the terms of any written agreement in truth represent what was agreed and the true agreement will often have to be gleaned from the all the circumstances of the case, of which the written agreement is only a part.”

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

	Erstellt von Matthew Fan vor etwa 11 Jahre