United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR A LYNCH (of Counsel) Messrs Maislish & Co Solicitors 1 Raymond Buildings Gray's Inn London WC1R 5BH


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: The question in this appeal is whether the Industrial Tribunal erred in law in holding that the Appellant, Mr Baxter, was not employed by the Respondent company.

The company was formed by the Appellant and two brothers, Mark and Nicholas Fernando. They were the only directors, holding the shares in the company equally. Accordingly, the Appellant was a minority shareholder. He was also the company secretary.

Each director and his wife was paid a salary from which tax and national insurance contributions were deducted. The Appellant was not issued with a written contract of service, apparently because the company accountant, Mr Buckley, did not believe that the directors were employees.

We have considered the Chairman's reasoning at paragraph 4 of her extended reasons and, based on the submissions made by Mr Lynch, in this case, we think that there is an arguable appeal which ought to proceed to a full hearing. For that purpose, we shall direct that the Appellant within 14 days write to the Respondent setting out the two matters in the evidence on which he seeks to rely at the full appeal hearing with a view to agreement between the parties that such evidence was given. In the event of a failure to agree, the matter should be referred to me for further directions.

The case will be listed for half-a-day, category C; skeleton arguments to be exchanged between the parties not less than 14 days before the hearing of the full appeal, such skeleton arguments to be lodged at the same time with this Tribunal.

Finally, Mr Lynch has applied to amend the notice of appeal. We grant him leave to amend in terms of the draft lodged with this Tribunal this morning.