At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE LADY SMITH
(SITTING ALONE)
1) MR G. McVEIGH
2) MRS R. MCVEIGH |
APPELLANT |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
For the Appellants | MR. COLIN BOURNE (of Counsel) Instructed by: RBS Mentor Services 100 West George Street Glasgow G2 1PP |
For the Respondent | MR DONALD CAMERON (Advocate) Instructed by: Quantum Claims Employment Division 70 Carden Place Queen's Cross Aberdeen AB10 1UL |
SUMMARY
Identity of employer. Tribunal found, on an assessment of documentary and oral evidence, that claimant employed by respondents and not by a limited company of which they were directors. On appeal, the EAT held that the Tribunal had not erred in carrying out an exercise which was substantially one of assessing fact.
THE HONOURABLE LADY SMITH
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
"That statement of terms and conditions stated on the face of it that the employers were 'Mr and Mrs McVeigh (the respondents in the present case) trading as 'Beauty Inc'."
THE TRIBUNAL'S JUDGMENT
"In considering the evidence and reaching a conclusion in this matter I have looked at written documentation comprising the productions as spoken to and have also had regard to the oral evidence given."
"In the latter case, the EAT gives guidance as to the approach to be adopted by a Tribunal in seeking to identify the employer. Written contractual arrangements fall to be looked at in the first place, enquiring whether they truly reflect the intention of the parties. If so then the Tribunal can determine the employer then decide whether that position has changed during the employment relationship and if so when this occurred and with what effect."
RELEVANT LAW
APPEAL
DISCUSSION
DISPOSAL