.png)
.png)
ANNE REDSTON explains substitution, sham and the Supreme Court’s decision in the recent Autoclenz case
KEY POINTS
- The facts of Autoclenz and the contractual terms.
- The court’s ability to set aside the term of the contract.
- The importance of the parties’ conduct and behaviour.
- Was there a genuine right of substitution?
Substitution is like magic. It changes employment into self-employment reducing contributions to the Exchequer and relieving engagers of expensive employment law obligations. Or does it?
In July 2011 the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in Autoclenz v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41. The main issue was whether substitution clauses – which allow an individual to send another person to perform the work in his place –...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
