abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

这页面没有简体中文版本,现以English显示

文章

2023年10月20日

作者:
Tim Healy, Irish Independent

Ireland: Delivery drivers for a pizza restaurant should be treated as employees, not contractors, rules Supreme Court

"Delivery drivers for pizza restaurant should be treated as employees, not contractors, Supreme Court finds", 20 Oct 2023

The Supreme Court has found that delivery drivers for a pizza restaurant should be treated as employees and not contractors.

The decision has important implications for workers in the gig economy.

The case concerned delivery drivers engaged under contracts in 2010/11 by Karshan (Midlands) Ltd, trading as Domino's Pizza.

The drivers argued they were employees for tax purposes and Karshan said they were independent contractors under "contracts for service".

Karshan had appealed a 2018 decision of a Tax Appeals Commissioner that the delivery drivers should be treated as PAYE workers.

The High Court rejected that appeal, but the Court of Appeal (CoA), in a 2-1 majority, overturned that decision...

In a unanimous decision today on Friday, a seven-judge Supreme Court overturned the CoA decision.

Giving the court's decision, Mr Justice Brian Murray said central to the appeal was whether it was necessary, to the establishment of the employment relationship, that there be a requirement that the employer and worker owe each other certain "mutual obligations"...

Mr Justice Murray said there was no such requirement in Irish law.

He said the question of whether a contract is one "of" or "for" services should – having regard to well-established case law – be resolved by reference to five questions...

The evidence disclosed "close control" by Karshan over the drivers when they work...

In observations accompanying the judgment, Mr Justice Murray said it must be stated that the finding that the drivers were employees did not, and cannot, bind any driver who may wish to contend that, in fact, they were not an employee for this or any other purpose. The question of whether drivers have continuous service for the purpose of other legislation, and in particular employment rights legislation, cannot be decided here, he said...

隐私资讯

本网站使用 cookie 和其他网络存储技术。您可以在下方设置您的隐私选项。您所作的更改将立即生效。

有关我们使用网络存储的更多信息,请参阅我们的 数据使用和 Cookie 政策

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

分析 cookie

ON
OFF

您浏览本网页时我们将以Google Analytics收集信息。接受此cookie将有助我们理解您的浏览资讯,并协助我们改善呈现资讯的方法。所有分析资讯都以匿名方式收集,我们并不能用相关资讯得到您的个人信息。谷歌在所有主要浏览器中都提供退出Google Analytics的添加应用程式。

市场营销cookies

ON
OFF

我们从第三方网站获得企业责任资讯,当中包括社交媒体和搜寻引擎。这些cookie协助我们理解相关浏览数据。

您在此网站上的隐私选项

本网站使用cookie和其他网络存储技术来增强您在必要核心功能之外的体验。