Connecting to LinkedIn...

W1siziisimnvbxbpbgvkx3rozw1lx2fzc2v0cy9qb2jzyxr0zwftl2pwzy9ibg9nlwjhbm5lci1kzwzhdwx0lmpwzyjdxq

TEAM News

Order Made in the Case of Simply Learning Tutor Agency Ltd & Others v Secretary of State for Business

On 18th September 2020 the High Court handed down its decision in the judicial review of Simply Learning Tutor Agency Ltd & Others v Secretary of State for Business [2020] EWHC 2461 (admin). Justice Mountfield heard the case and ordered that the meaning of “employment” in Section 13(1) of the Employment Agencies Act 1973 (EAA) should be read to include work provided by natural or legal persons who provide services including tutoring services on a self-employed basis as an independent contractor.  

The various tutoring companies who had brought the claim had argued that they were not employment agencies or employment businesses and therefore were not subject to the regulation put in place by the EAA. Their reasoning was that their business model did not fall within the definitions provided because where an operator merely introduced suppliers to customers or clients they did not do anything which resulted in the employment of tutors. They simply provided introduction services combined with payment collection and administrative services which would not amount to being an employment agency or employment business under the definitions provided in the EAA. This argument was found to be wholly unconvincing.

Justice Mountfield concluded that the definition of employee within the EAA was wider than that at common law, as it included both those who would be classed as employees at common law and those who would fall outside of this definition but who still offer their services in some way. Justice Mountfield stated that her reading of the definition of employment at section 13(1) of the EAA is that this was intended to include all situations where a business supplies people personally to preform work for a third party and that this is in keeping with the broad protective purpose of the legislation as a whole.

In summary, Justice Mountfield noted that “in short, where a business holds itself out as a ‘middleman’ between a person who needs services and the person offering to supply them, the protective terms of the EAA and the regulatory requirements of the Conduct Regulations will usually apply to the ‘middleman’ business for the protection of work-seekers, hirers and work-users” and that these tutoring agencies were no exception to this general rule and so the act should be construed accordingly.

If this judgement affects your business, or you have any queries about agency and recruitment law please contact us for more information about how our specialist recruitment and employment lawyers can help you on 0345 872 6666.

 

This bulletin is for general guidance only and should not be used for any other purpose. It does not constitute, and should not be relied upon as legal advice.

JMW Solicitors is a Limited Liability Partnership.

The copyright in this article is owned by JMW. Any reproduction of this article should be credited to JMW. All rights reserved.