The GP (Narayan – “N”) in the case below was deemed a worker by the Tribunal, with which the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) agreed, despite N being engaged and paid via a limited company from 2015 (which the healthcare provider was not initially aware of).
The judge noted the main features of the N’s role, that:-
– she had worked regular shifts for around 12 years, but that there was no mutuality of obligation.
– she could work for other providers, had her own equipment and insurance;
– she had to work personally and could not send a substitute;
– the healthcare provider had to audit the N’s services.
The EAT said the above case was different to Suhail v Herts Urgent Care because the Claimant, in that case, was actively marketing his services, whereas N worked regular shifts for one provider over many years.
We recommend you review your contractor agreements to ensure that status is clear to avoid any unwanted legal/financial consequences.
DISCLAIMER: This document is intended to be a guide to the current law only. It does not constitute legal advice and you are not entitled to rely upon it. You should always take proper legal advice relating to your own situation before acting.Centurion Legal