Employment status: "Sham" contract for services did not reflect parties' true relationship
-
expand disabled
Protectacoat Firthglow Ltd v Szilagyi [2009] IRLR 365 CA (0 other reports)
In Protectacoat Firthglow Ltd v Szilagyi [2009] IRLR 365 CA, the Court of Appeal held that a purported contract for services - entered into by the worker as a prerequisite for being given work - was a sham, because it did not represent the parties' true intentions and expectations. The individual was an employee, not an independent contractor.
To continue reading, register for free access now.
Register now
Already a Brightmine HR and Compliance Centre user?
Log in
