Claimant v British Free Range Egg Producers Association (BFREPA)
Outcome
Individual claims
This was a preliminary hearing on employment status and time limits. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee and the claim was in time. The substantive unfair dismissal claim has not yet been determined.
This was a preliminary hearing on employment status and time limits. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee and the claim was in time. The substantive wages claim has not yet been determined.
This was a preliminary hearing on employment status and time limits. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee and the claim was in time. The substantive holiday pay claim has not yet been determined.
This was a preliminary hearing on employment status and time limits. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee and the claim was in time. The substantive wrongful dismissal claim has not yet been determined.
Claim for pension loss arising from failure to enrol in automatic enrolment scheme under Pensions Act 2008. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee. The substantive claim has not yet been determined.
Facts
The claimant worked for the respondent agriculture association for 12.5 years from November 2011 to April 2024, initially as Policy Director then Chief Executive. He was engaged under written contracts labelled 'Contract for Services' requiring him to invoice monthly as self-employed. He was paid a fixed monthly retainer (rising from £35,000 to £54,766.36 annually) for set days per week (2.5 to 3.5 days). In February 2023, the respondent's officers acknowledged the relationship looked like employment for tax purposes. The claimant's engagement was terminated in April 2024.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant was an employee, not self-employed, despite the written contracts stating otherwise. The tribunal applied the Ready Mixed Concrete test and looked behind the contractual labels to the reality of the relationship. Key factors included: mutuality of obligation (fixed monthly payments for 12.5 years), personal service (no genuine right of substitution), control by the Council/Board, the permanence of the relationship, restrictive covenants, and payment of expenses. The claim was made in time against the first respondent.
Practical note
A long-term arrangement with fixed monthly payments, specified working days, no genuine substitution rights, and organisational control will be an employment relationship regardless of how the parties label it or handle tax, particularly where there is inequality of bargaining power.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3308980/2024
- Decision date
- 5 August 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- agriculture
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Policy Director / Chief Executive
- Salary band
- £50,000–£60,000
- Service
- 13 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep