Sejpal v Rodericks Dental Ltd [2022]

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