Claimant v NewsTeam Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker but a self-employed contractor with a genuine right of substitution. The tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the claim for unlawful deduction from wages, which requires employee or worker status under s.13 ERA 1996.
Facts
The claimant worked as a newspaper delivery driver from December 2023 to February 2024 under a written contract describing him as a self-employed contractor. He claimed unlawful deduction of £800 from his wages, imposed as a penalty when he took a pre-booked holiday without arranging substitute cover. The written contract contained an express right to use substitutes and stated it was not a contract of employment. The claimant acknowledged understanding these terms and accepted the agreement was not an employment contract.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker but a genuine self-employed contractor. The written contract accurately reflected the parties' agreement and contained an unfettered right of substitution, inconsistent with an obligation of personal performance. As employee or worker status is required to bring claims for unlawful deduction from wages, the tribunal had no jurisdiction and dismissed the claim.
Practical note
A clear, genuine and unfettered right of substitution in a written contract, where the parties' true agreement is reflected in those written terms, will defeat both employee and worker status claims.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2302792/2024
- Decision date
- 14 February 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- media
- Represented
- No
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Newspaper delivery driver
- Service
- 2 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No