In Stringfellows Restaurants Ltd v Quashie (CA – 21 December) a company (S) operated two ‘gentlemen’s entertainment clubs’ in London. It arranged for young women to dance at the clubs and treated them as self-employed. The dancers received payments from customers at the clubs in the form of vouchers which S distributed. A dancer (Q) who had worked at one of the clubs from June 2007 to December 2008 took proceedings against S in the Employment Tribunal contending that she had been an employee of S and had been unfairly dismissed. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that Q had been an employee but the CA unanimously allowed S’s appeal holding that Q had been self-employed. Elias LJ held that ‘the club did not employ the dancers to dance’ and that the dancers paid the club ‘to be...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Stringfellows Restaurants Ltd v Quashie (CA – 21 December) a company (S) operated two ‘gentlemen’s entertainment clubs’ in London. It arranged for young women to dance at the clubs and treated them as self-employed. The dancers received payments from customers at the clubs in the form of vouchers which S distributed. A dancer (Q) who had worked at one of the clubs from June 2007 to December 2008 took proceedings against S in the Employment Tribunal contending that she had been an employee of S and had been unfairly dismissed. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that Q had been an employee but the CA unanimously allowed S’s appeal holding that Q had been self-employed. Elias LJ held that ‘the club did not employ the dancers to dance’ and that the dancers paid the club ‘to be...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
