Miss K Gyumisheva (1) Mr A Arsenov (2) v Iliyan Petkov — 2021

At the preliminary hearing on 24 and 25 May 2021, the tribunal considered whether Miss K Gyumisheva and Mr A Arsenov, who worked and lived at the Fairview Hotel in Blackpool between February 2018 and July 2019, were workers for the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the National Minimum Wage legislation, and whether KG was an employee for Equality Act 2010 purposes. The respondent relied on a written 'Contract for Management' describing the arrangement as self-employed and providing for monthly payments of GBP 1,550, split as GBP 775 each, but the tribunal said the label was not decisive and examined the reality of the relationship.

The tribunal found that the respondent interviewed and instructed the claimants, required them to manage bookings, reception, breakfast and housekeeping, and retained control over prices, closures and financial reporting. It rejected the respondent's case that occasional cover by other people showed a genuine right of substitution: those arrangements were for holidays or breaks, were controlled by the respondent, and did not negate personal service. The tribunal also noted that the claimants were subordinate to the respondent and worked under his control and direction even though he was often abroad.

Applying section 230(3) ERA 1996, regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, section 54(3) of the National Minimum Wage legislation, and section 83(2) Equality Act 2010, together with authorities including Autoclenz v Belcher, Bates van Winkelhof v Clyde & Co, Pimlico Plumbers v Smith and Jivraj v Hashwani, the tribunal held that both claimants were workers for ERA, WTR and NMW purposes, and that KG was an employee for Equality Act purposes. No substantive liability on the wage, working time, minimum wage or discrimination claims, and no remedy, was determined at this hearing.