Mr S Cresswell v High Speed Two (HS2) Limited and 2 others — 2024

The Tribunal determined a preliminary issue about whether the claimant was a worker of the three respondents for the purposes of section 43K(1)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant sought a finding on worker status and related case management orders; the case management orders were made separately.

The Tribunal found that the claimant worked for each of the three respondents and that all parties accepted section 230(3) did not apply. Applying the guidance in McTigue, the Tribunal found that the claimant had been supplied by the third respondent and that the terms on which he was engaged were not substantially determined by him.

The Tribunal concluded that each of the three respondents substantially determined the terms on which the claimant was engaged to do the work. It therefore found that the claimant was a worker of the first, second and third respondents for the purposes of the protected disclosure provisions.