| In a recent case called Scully v Northamptonshire County Council, Mr Scully worked as a carer for his brother. His brother received payments from the council to fund his care and used this money to pay Mr Scully. Mr Scully brought claims against the council for discrimination and unpaid wages, arguing that he was actually employed by the council.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that Mr Scully was not employed by the council. There was no express or implied contract between them.
Key reasons included:
- Mr Scully’s payslips listed his brother as his employer.
- His brother’s family arranged cover when Mr Scully was unavailable, not the council.
- Mr Scully’s mother controlled who provided care, and had previously dismissed a carer.
- The council gave Mr Scully no training.
- The council did not supervise or manage Mr Scully’s work.
- There was no need to imply a contract with the council because a valid employment relationship could exist between Mr Scully and his brother. Even if his brother lacked capacity, that would make the arrangement voidable – not automatically void.
|
