Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Chalimoniuk v Transkol Limited and FN Transport Limited [2020]
Chalimoniuk v Transkol Limited and FN Transport Limited [2020]
Published on: 19/11/2020
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
Background

This claim was for unauthorised deductions from wages under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and unpaid holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998.  The main issue in this case focused on the Claimant’s employment status; was the claimant the worker of either or both respondents at all relevant times in accordance with the definition in section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996?

The Claimant did work for both Respondents between October/November 2017 and March/April 2019, driving the Respondents lorries delivering goods on behalf of the Respondents third party clients.

The Judge in this case found that the Claimant was not a worker and therefore was not entitled to any employment rights relating to his claims for unauthorised deductions from wages and holiday pay.

The Tribunal found that in advance of conducting any work, it had been made clear to the Claimant that in order to do so, he had to set up a company and then have the company supply the Claimant’s services as a driver to the Respondents.  Whilst accepting this was advantageous, the Judge commented that it was not illegal.

The Judge was critical of the Claimant who he considered was attempting to portray that he was naive.  The Judge commented the Claimant entered into the agreement “with his eyes wide open”.  The Judge considered the Claimant had an understanding and had taken accountancy advice on IR35 implications before entering into the agreement with the Respondent.
https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-s-chalimoniuk-v-transkol-ltd-and-fn-transport-ltd-2601798-2019-and-2601841-2019

In a subsequent costs hearing the respondents’ costs and wasted costs applications were rejected, with the exception that the claimant must pay the respondents’ travel expenses totalling £14.85.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f2d3bbd8fa8f57ac968fbc9/Mr_S_Chalimoniuk_v_Transkol_Limited___Other__2601798_19___Other__Reserved_Judgment.pdf 

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer 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. This article is correct at 19/11/2020