Report comment

Anon 15.13 You are wrong to imply that establishing employment status is simple, it clearly is not, hence the plethora of case law down the years and large pile of reports into the subject. You are also wrong to state that the 'core issue' is whose business and customers Smith was working for. That may be one of a large number of factors that the SC will need to consider but it is by no means determinitive of employments status. If PP can convince the court that Smith had a genuine right of substitution fro example, which is a core issue, then he cannot have been a worker in law.

However, I agree that the decision of the CoA in this case is unlikely to be disturbed, given both the contractual terms (which were a confusing mess and contained terms conflicting with self-employed status, including notably post-termination non compete clauses) and the reality of how Mr Smith worked day to day.