Young & Woods Ltd v West
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1980 |
| Year | 1980 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
56 cases
- Sagicor Insurance Company v Carter and Others
- Mary Colete John v South East Asia Insurance Bhd
-
Minister for Agriculture v Barry
...that test 'very helpful' in Ferguson v John Dawson & Partners (Contractors) Ltd [ 1976] 1 W.L.R. 1213. In Young & Woods Ltd v. West [1980] I.R.L.R. 201 I adopted it and Ackner L.J., at p.208, obtained much assistance from it. But to accept it as the 'fundamental' test is I think misleading,......
-
Barnett v Brabyn (Inspector of Taxes)
...Ltd v Minister of Social Security ELR[1969] 2 QB 173O'Kelly v Trusthouse Forte plc ELR[1984] QB 90Young & Woods Ltd v West UNK[1980] IRLR 201 10. The commissioners who heard the appeal (i) That the taxpayer's version of the events leading to the cessation of his relationship with LTV was un......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
-
Access to Justice for Migrant Workers
...11 ITR 93; Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Ltd [2000] IRLR 578; Lightfoot v D&J Sporting Ltd [1996] IRLR 64; Young & Woods Ltd v West [1980] IRLR 201. 42 The test as to whether the employee had knowledge of the illegality is a subjective one. See Corby v Morrison [1980] IRLR 218. 43 See for ex......
-
A Purposive Approach to Employment Protection or a Missed Opportunity?
...the term ‘pretence’ as a means of trying to createa flexible doctrine free from the constraints of Snook.37 He went on to say‘[p]arties30 [1980] IRLR 201 (CA).31 ibid at [10] (Stephenson LJ).32 [1976] IRLR 346 (CA) at [30] (Megaw LJ).33 Catamaran Cruisers Ltd vWilliams [1994] IRLR386 (EAT).3......
-
False Self‐Employment, Autonomy and Regulating for Decent Work: Improving Working Conditions in the UK Stripping Industry
...their relationshipmight be an important factor if the legal tests for ‘employee’ or ‘worker’ areinconclusive (Young & Woods Ltd vWes t [1980] IRLR 201). In short, if adancer does not identify with ‘employee’ or ‘worker’ status it might not onlyprevent her approachingan ET; it might also hur......