Mr D Lee father For the v Mr W Lane, Solicitor — 2021

At an open preliminary hearing on 12 July 2021 before Employment Judge Truscott QC sitting alone by CVP in London South, the tribunal heard evidence from the claimant and Mr L Crookes for the respondent. The issue was whether Mr J Lee was still an apprentice when his employment ended, and the tribunal also had to consider whether any breach of contract claim should be struck out if he was not. The written apprenticeship agreement, signed on 21 June 2016, described the arrangement as a contract of employment and said it was for a fixed term ending on or before 31 August 2019. The separate learning agreement with JTL, signed on 14 July 2016, recorded a planned end date of 15 September 2020. The respondent later issued terms from 1 September 2019 stating that the claimant would be employed as an Electrical Improver at £8 per hour.

The tribunal found no evidence that the arrangement was a statutory apprenticeship, but said the structure of the agreements and training contract appeared to meet most statutory requirements. It rejected the respondent's case that the new Electrical Improver contract made the claimant a full-time employee from 1 September 2019, and held that the apprenticeship agreement was erroneous as to its term and end date. Relying on the contra proferentem rule and the aid to construction in Investors Compensation Scheme 1998 1 WLR 896 HL, the tribunal concluded that the agreement should have run consistently with the learning agreement to 15 September 2020 and that the new contract did not alter the claimant's apprentice status. The tribunal then said that a telephone case management hearing would be arranged to deal with the later case management issues.