Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 AUGUST 2011

Employment Status

The Supreme Court considers whether express contractual provisions in a consultancy agreement reflected genuine self-employment, and concludes that they did not.

United KingdomEmployment and HR
Michael Bronstein
Michael Bronstein
James Davies
James Davies

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & ors

The Supreme Court considers whether express contractual provisions in a consultancy agreement reflected genuine self-employment, and concludes that they did not.

Employees come with two expensive price tags. The first is a raft of statutory rights, such as the right not to be unfairly dismissed. The second is employer's National Insurance Contributions, currently charged at 13.8% of earnings and paid by the employer. Businesses are well aware of this and their professional advisers will be all too familiar with the refrain "let's make him a consultant then".

Many businesses will know that such a 'transformation' is not easy to achieve and that the manner in which the parties describe themselves (and their intentions) will not be decisive if, in reality, the 'consultant' is treated no differently than employees carrying out the same job.

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