Mr P Tapsell, counsel For the v Respondent — 2019

The tribunal heard a preliminary issue on whether Mr A Nottage was an employee of NEC (UK) Limited for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and whether he was in employment for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. The claimant had brought claims for unfair dismissal, age discrimination and disability discrimination. The tribunal recorded that the written contractual arrangements were not between Mr Nottage personally and NEC, but between NEC and limited companies, first Alan Nottage Consulting Limited and later ATNCOMMS Limited.

On the facts, the tribunal found that by the time the relationship ended in March 2020 the claimant was working under the ATNCOMMS Limited contract and submitting invoices in that company name. It accepted that the claimant worked exclusively for NEC for a number of years and was integrated into its work, but found the contract allowed ATNCOMMS to send another individual and that this right of substitution was inconsistent with employment. The tribunal also relied on the written terms, the claimant's VAT registration, public liability insurance, payment through invoices, responsibility for tax and National Insurance, and the absence of sick pay, holiday pay and application of employee policies.

The tribunal considered the claimant's reliance on matters such as the HMRC CEST outcome, the degree of integration, and the fact that for a period some invoices were not in the name of a limited company. It also referred to Ready Mixed Concrete, Uber v Aslam, Autoclenz, Tilson v Alstom Transport and Bates van Winkelhof in analysing status. It concluded that no contract of employment could be implied between Mr Nottage and NEC, that he was an independent contractor, and that he was not required to provide personal service. The unfair dismissal claim and the age and disability discrimination claims were therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.