Sejpal v Rodericks Dental Ltd Posted In: Case Law
Decision NumberEAT 91
Legal BodyEmployment Appeal Tribunal (UKEAT)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionContracts of Employment
The claimant, a dentist, began working for the respondent in 2010. The claimant’s contract with the respondent outlined that she had to provide a locum after 14 days of failing to use the respondent’s facilities. She never did this. The issues arose from 2018 onwards after the claimant went on maternity leave. The respondent announced that it would be closing its practice in which the claimant worked. The others within that practice were redeployed yet the claimant asserted that her contract had been terminated.
The respondent argued that the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker. This was a successful argument at first instance but this was appealed
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, start your free trial today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.