Anglian Windows Ltd ta Anglian Home Improvements v Mr A Webb
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Mrs Justice Eady |
| Subject Matter | Not landmark |
| Court | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
| Published date | 03 November 2023 |
Judgment approved by the Court for handing down: ANGLIAN WINDOWS LTD v WEBB
© EAT 2023 [2023] EAT 138
Page 1
Neutral Citation Number: [2023] EAT 138
Case No: EA-2021-000905-DXA
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Rolls Building
Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL
Date: 3 November 2023
Before :
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE EADY DBE, PRESIDENT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
ANGLIAN WINDOWS LTD T/A ANGLIAN HOME IMPROVEMENTS
Appellant
- and –
MR ALLISTER WEBB
Respondent
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr David Reade KC (instructed by Paladin-Knight Ltd) for the Appellant
Mr Darshan Patel (instructed by Lewis Silkin LLP) for the Respondent
Hearing date:10 October 2023
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
This judgment was handed down by the Judge remotely by circulation to the parties' representatives
by email and release to The National Archives.
The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 10:30 on 3 November 2023
Judgment approved by the Court for handing down: ANGLIAN WINDOWS LTD v WEBB
© EAT 2023 [2023] EAT 138
Page 2
SUMMARY
Unfair dismissal – employment status – section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996 - application to
strike out claim brought by partner
The claimant and his wife operated as a two-person partnership. Through that partnership, the
claimant provided services to the respondent as an Area Sales Leader, for which payment was also
made through the partnership. Upon the claimant’s subsequent complaint of unfair dismissal, the
respondent applied for his claim to be struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The
ET refused the application, on the basis that the fact of these arrangements (which involved a genuine
partnership and were not suggested to be a sham) did not preclude the possibility of the claimant
being able to establish employee status. In reaching this conclusion, the ET sought to distinguish the
EAT’s decision in Firthglow Ltd v Descombes and anor UKEAT/0916/03. The respondent
appealed.
Held: allowing the appeal
The ET had erred in seeking to draw a distinction between this case and Descombes, where it had
been held that, where the relevant work was being undertaken under an agreement with a partnership,
that precluded the possibility of one of the individual partners being able to claim he was an employee.
The ET ought to have followed Descombes. Although it was open to the EAT not to follow a previous
decision at this level, none of the circumstances that might warrant adopting this course applied
(British Gas Trading v Lock [2016] ICR 503 EAT followed). Moreover, the agreed facts,
confirmed by the ET’s own findings, meant that the possibility of the existence of a contract of
employment between the claimant and the respondent was precluded in the circumstances of this
case. That being so, the claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal could have no reasonable prospect of
success and the ET ought to have allowed the respondent’s strike out application.
To continue reading
Request your trial