Cases3314724/2023

Claimant v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust

3 November 2025Before Employment Judge C H O'RourkeCambridgeremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Automatic Unfair Dismissalnot determined

This preliminary hearing determined only the issue of employment status. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee, giving it jurisdiction to hear the automatic unfair dismissal claim. The merits of the dismissal claim itself were not determined at this preliminary hearing.

Facts

The claimant, an orthopaedic surgeon, worked for an NHS Trust from 1 June to 3 August 2023, introduced via an agency. The Trust terminated his contract on one week's notice, treating him as an agency worker. He was required to complete the Trust's induction, worked shifts on a surgical rota, was paid by PAYE, and subject to a high degree of control, with no possibility of substitution. The contract, though titled for 'temporary agency workers', contained many terms typical of employment.

Decision

The tribunal found that the claimant was an employee, not an agency worker. Despite the contract's title, its terms and the reality of the working relationship demonstrated mutuality of obligation, high control, personal service, and integration. The tribunal applied the contra proferentem rule to ambiguous terms and found that the nature of the work (highly qualified surgeon in NHS setting) necessitated an employment relationship. The tribunal therefore has jurisdiction to hear the automatic unfair dismissal claim.

Practical note

A carefully drafted contract is normally determinative of employment status, but where a contract is imposed on a worker with contradictory terms, tribunals will look to the substance of the relationship, and high levels of control, integration, and mutuality of obligation in professional NHS roles may mandate employee status regardless of labels.

Legal authorities cited

Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497MOD HQ Defence Dental Service v Kettle UKEAT/0308/06Montgomery v Johnson Underwood Ltd [2001] EWCA ICR 819

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.230

Case details

Case number
3314724/2023
Decision date
3 November 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Orthopaedic Surgeon
Service
2 months

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister