Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 MAY 2005

Agency workers or end user employee?

In the recent case of Astbury v Gist Limited the Employment Appeal Tribunal ("EAT") has examined the question, raised by the Court of Appeal in Dacas v Brook Street Bureau, whether an express contract for services between a worker and an agency precluded an implied contract of employment between the worker and the end user.

United KingdomEmployment and HR
Simon Jeffreys
Simon Jeffreys
Anthony Fincham
Anthony Fincham
Alexander Green
Alexander Green

In the recent case of Astbury v Gist Limited the Employment Appeal Tribunal ("EAT") has examined the question, raised by the Court of Appeal in Dacas v Brook Street Bureau, whether an express contract for services between a worker and an agency precluded an implied contract of employment between the worker and the end user. It also made recommendations about establishing the appropriate respondents for agency workers making claims. This is a particular issue for agency workers who may have difficulty establishing the necessary employment status with the end user, which makes daily use of his services, or the relevant employment agency.

The EAT has accepted that implied contracts of employment can exist between workers and end users provided that there is a very careful factual assessment before any such conclusion is reached. It also recommended that in situations where there were "triangular relationships," the tribunal may order that any person (i.e. the agency or

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from