22:
208:
day to day control. So the
Tribunal had been correct to find no employment contract between Dacas and Brook Street. Instead, it was possible for there to have been an implied contract between the council and Dacas, but this point had not been appealed. They thought an employment contract would exist between Dacas and the council after ‘considering all the evidence’.
207:
The Court of Appeal, Mummery LJ, Sedley LJ and Munby J, held that Brook Street had been under no obligation to provide Dacas with work, and Dacas had been under no obligation to accept, and simply because Brook Street had paid her, this did not make Brook Street her employer. Instead the council had
198:
The
Employment Tribunal held that Dacas had neither a contract of service with the employment agency, nor any contract at all with the council. On appeal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held the Tribunal had erred in law, and found that Dacas was employed by Brook Street.
39:
598:
583:
365:
195:) as a cleaner for four years. She was dismissed for apparent rudeness to a visitor. She claimed unfair dismissal against both Brook Street and the local council.
351:
86:
58:
588:
578:
325:
65:
593:
431:
391:
254:
72:
379:
237:
54:
105:
487:
269:
459:
403:
43:
515:
445:
339:
79:
283:
32:
297:
230:
501:
274:
287:
311:
223:
192:
449:
560:
491:
477:
139:
519:
505:
435:
421:
417:
259:
188:
572:
540:
529:
176:
463:
329:
315:
301:
407:
21:
215:
164:
Implied contract, mutuality of obligation, employee, unfair dismissal
219:
15:
179:
case, concerning the employment rights of agency workers.
561:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2004/217.html
158:
150:
145:
135:
127:
122:
46:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
367:Market Invest Ltd v Minister for Social Security
231:
8:
353:Ready Mixed Concrete Ltd v SS for Pensions
238:
224:
216:
119:
599:Employment agencies of the United Kingdom
584:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases
106:Learn how and when to remove this message
326:Clyde & Co LLP v Bates van Winkelhof
552:
55:"Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd"
7:
474:Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd
432:Lane v Shire Roofing Co (Oxford) Ltd
392:Nethermere (St Neots) Ltd v Gardiner
255:Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Wurttenberg
172:Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd
123:Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd
44:adding citations to reliable sources
14:
488:Muscat v Cable & Wireless Plc
154:Mummery LJ, Sedley LJ and Munby J
270:Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz
20:
589:2004 in United Kingdom case law
460:Carmichael v National Power plc
404:Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung
31:needs additional citations for
579:United Kingdom labour case law
380:O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte plc
187:Patricia Dacas had worked for
1:
516:Muschett v H M Prison Service
446:McMeechan v SS for Employment
594:London Borough of Wandsworth
340:Cassidy v Minister of Health
615:
284:Employment Rights Act 1996
246:Workplace protection cases
526:
512:
498:
484:
470:
456:
442:
428:
414:
400:
388:
376:
362:
348:
336:
322:
308:
294:
281:
266:
251:
163:
298:Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher
191:(on assignment through
502:James v Greenwich LBC
40:improve this article
175:EWCA Civ 217 is a
536:
535:
312:Jivraj v Hashwani
168:
167:
116:
115:
108:
90:
606:
563:
557:
368:
354:
240:
233:
226:
217:
193:Brook Street plc
146:Court membership
120:
111:
104:
100:
97:
91:
89:
48:
24:
16:
614:
613:
609:
608:
607:
605:
604:
603:
569:
568:
567:
566:
558:
554:
549:
537:
532:
522:
508:
494:
480:
466:
452:
438:
424:
410:
396:
384:
372:
366:
358:
352:
344:
332:
318:
304:
290:
277:
262:
247:
244:
214:
205:
185:
131:Court of Appeal
112:
101:
95:
92:
49:
47:
37:
25:
12:
11:
5:
612:
610:
602:
601:
596:
591:
586:
581:
571:
570:
565:
564:
551:
550:
548:
545:
544:
543:
534:
533:
527:
524:
523:
513:
510:
509:
499:
496:
495:
485:
482:
481:
471:
468:
467:
457:
454:
453:
443:
440:
439:
429:
426:
425:
418:Hall v Lorimer
415:
412:
411:
401:
398:
397:
389:
386:
385:
377:
374:
373:
363:
360:
359:
349:
346:
345:
337:
334:
333:
323:
320:
319:
309:
306:
305:
295:
292:
291:
282:
279:
278:
267:
264:
263:
252:
249:
248:
245:
243:
242:
235:
228:
220:
213:
210:
204:
201:
189:Wandsworth LBC
184:
181:
166:
165:
161:
160:
156:
155:
152:
151:Judges sitting
148:
147:
143:
142:
137:
133:
132:
129:
125:
124:
114:
113:
28:
26:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
611:
600:
597:
595:
592:
590:
587:
585:
582:
580:
577:
576:
574:
562:
556:
553:
546:
542:
541:UK labour law
539:
538:
531:
530:UK labour law
525:
521:
518:
517:
511:
507:
504:
503:
497:
493:
490:
489:
483:
479:
476:
475:
469:
465:
462:
461:
455:
451:
450:EWCA Civ 1166
448:
447:
441:
437:
434:
433:
427:
423:
420:
419:
413:
409:
406:
405:
399:
394:
393:
387:
382:
381:
375:
370:
369:
361:
356:
355:
347:
342:
341:
335:
331:
328:
327:
321:
317:
314:
313:
307:
303:
300:
299:
293:
289:
285:
280:
276:
272:
271:
265:
261:
257:
256:
250:
241:
236:
234:
229:
227:
222:
221:
218:
211:
209:
202:
200:
196:
194:
190:
182:
180:
178:
177:UK labour law
174:
173:
162:
157:
153:
149:
144:
141:
138:
134:
130:
126:
121:
118:
110:
107:
99:
96:December 2023
88:
85:
81:
78:
74:
71:
67:
64:
60:
57: –
56:
52:
51:Find sources:
45:
41:
35:
34:
29:This article
27:
23:
18:
17:
555:
514:
500:
492:EWCA Civ 220
486:
478:EWCA Civ 217
473:
472:
458:
444:
430:
416:
402:
390:
378:
364:
350:
338:
324:
310:
296:
268:
253:
206:
197:
186:
171:
170:
169:
140:EWCA Civ 217
117:
102:
93:
83:
76:
69:
62:
50:
38:Please help
33:verification
30:
520:EWCA Civ 25
506:EWCA Civ 35
436:EWCA Civ 37
422:EWCA Civ 25
573:Categories
547:References
66:newspapers
371:2 QB 173
357:2 QB 497
343:2 KB 343
275:C-397/01
212:See also
203:Judgment
159:Keywords
136:Citation
464:UKHL 47
395:ICR 612
383:ICR 730
330:UKSC 32
316:UKSC 40
302:UKSC 41
273:(2005)
260:C-66/85
258:(1986)
80:scholar
408:UKPC 1
82:
75:
68:
61:
53:
183:Facts
128:Court
87:JSTOR
73:books
528:see
59:news
288:230
42:by
575::
286:s
559:[
239:e
232:t
225:v
109:)
103:(
98:)
94:(
84:·
77:·
70:·
63:·
36:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
