Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (‘SEISS’)- Old Square Chambers
‘With the scheme going live on 13 May 2020, Giles Powell and Conor Kennedy consider the SEISS and its effects.’
Old Square Chambers, 12th May 2020
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
Category: self-employment
New Judgment: Fowler v Commissioners for HMRC [2020] UKSC 22 – UKSC Blog
‘Mr Fowler is a qualified diver who is resident in the Republic of South Africa. During the 2011/12 and 2012/13 tax years he undertook diving engagements in the waters of the UK’s continental shelf. HMRC stated that he is liable to pay UK income tax for this period. Whether he is liable depends on the application of a Double Taxation Treaty between the UK and South Africa. Article 7 of the Treaty provides that self-employed persons are taxed only where they are resident (i.e. South Africa), whereas article 14 provides that employees may be taxed where they work (i.e. the UK). For the purposes of this appeal, the parties have assumed that Mr Fowler was an employee. Mr Fowler claims he is nevertheless not liable to pay tax in the UK. His case centres on a “deeming provision” in section 15 of the UK’s Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 (“ITTOIA”). This provides that an employed seabed diver is “treated” as self-employed for the purposes of UK income tax.’
UKSC Blog, 26th May 2020
Source: ukscblog.com
Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (‘SEISS’) – Old Square Chambers
‘With the scheme going live on 13 May 2020, Giles Powell and Conor Kennedy consider the SEISS and its effects.’
Old Square Chambers, 12th May 2020
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
The COVID-19 Self-Employment Income Support Scheme – Thomas More Chambers
‘On 26 March 2020 the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a package of support for Britain’s self-employed workers to help them through the COVID-19 crisis. It became immediately clear that higher earners making profits above £50,000 would lose out. The Chancellor, however, highlighted that it would benefit 95% of people who receive the majority of their income from self-employment and that it was “reasonable, proportionate and fair” to exclude those higher earners. The Treasury estimated that this approximately 3.8 million people would benefit.’
Thomas More Chambers, 29th April 2020
Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk
Credit hire – financial losses of self-employed drivers – KCH Garden Sq
‘Claims concerning credit hire charges appear before the courts on a daily basis. It is vital for litigators in this field to be familiar with the decision of the High Court of Justice in late 2019, in Humayum Hussain v EUI Limited [2019] EWHC 2647 (QB); [2019] 10 WLUK 152, (‘Hussain’). The principles detailed in the judgment are applicable to self-employed drivers, including but not limited to, chauffeurs, delivery drivers and hauliers.’
KCH Garden Sq, 7th February 2020
Source: kchgardensquare.co.uk
Employment and Discrimination Newsletter – January 2020 – 3PB
‘Craig Ludlow edits 3PB’s latest Employment & Discrimination newsletter, including contributions from Andrew MacPhail and Daniel Brown.’
3PB, 6th January 2020
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
Laura Nelson discusses Humayum Hussain v EUI Ltd (2019) – Park Square Barristers
‘The court outlined the principles applying to self-employed drivers whom hire replacement vehicles whilst their own is off the road as a result of a road traffic accident. The true measure of loss is the loss of profit suffered whilst their own, damaged vehicle is reasonably off the road. Hire costs of replacement vehicles are prima facie recoverable, but where the cost of hire significantly exceeds the loss of profit, the court will ordinarily limit damages to the lost profit unless the claimant can establish that they had acted reasonably.’
Park Square Barristers, 24th October 2019
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
BBC presenters told to pay tens of thousands in back taxes as judge rules against them – Daily Telegraph
‘Three BBC news presenters have been told to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds in back taxes, despite the High Court finding that the corporation forced them into the wrong contracts.’
Daily Telegraph, 18th September 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
SRA: ‘Independent solicitors’ could come together in chambers – Legal Futures
‘The new breed of freelance solicitor – or what will officially be called an ‘independent solicitor’ – could join forces with others in a chambers-style arrangement, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has suggested.’
Legal Futures, 5th July 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
Solicitor can sue firm as employee after ‘informal’ partnership rejected – Law Society’s Gazette
‘A solicitor introduced to an elevated role in her former firm through a historic partnership agreement can make an employment claim as an employee, a tribunal has ruled.’
Law Society's Gazette, 27th June 2019
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
Lorraine Kelly wins £1.2m tax case against HMRC over ITV work – BBC News
‘Lorraine Kelly has won a row over a £1.2m tax bill, after a judge ruled she was not employed by ITV, but performs as her “chatty” TV persona.’
BBC News, 21st March 2019
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Nicholas Siddall on Uber: Form, Substance and Judicial Intervention – Littleton Chambers
‘The long running saga of whether Uber drivers are workers has been decided in the Court of Appeal and a split court has granted permission to appeal. This blog analyses the differing approaches in the Court of Appeal and the arguments that are likely to be advanced before the Supreme Court.’
Littleton Chambers, 23rd January 2019
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
The Employment Rights of Uber Drivers: A Battle Won, the War Goes On – Oxford Human Rights Hub
‘The judgment of the English Court of Appeal in Uber B.V. & others v Aslam & others (Case No: A2/2017/3467; 19 December 2018) has been hailed as a victory for workers. Uber’s business model, in common with many digital platforms, depends on classifying its drivers as independent contractors, who do not enjoy the rights of “employees” or “workers”. In essence, the majority of the Court endorsed the finding of the Employment Tribunal (ET) that these contractual provisions “do not correspond with the practical reality” and that the notion of Uber in London as “a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common ‘platform’ is to our minds faintly ridiculous.”’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 14th January 2019
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
Uber loses latest legal bid over driver rights – BBC News
‘Uber has lost an appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be treated as workers rather than self-employed.’
BBC News, 19th December 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Deliveroo riders lose high court battle to gain union recognition – The Guardian
‘Deliveroo riders have lost a high court battle to gain union recognition, in a blow to gig economy campaigners.’
The Guardian, 5th December 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
Uber appeals against drivers’ rights to pay and holiday – BBC News
‘A long-running case over the status of Uber drivers will be heard in the Court of Appeal on Tuesday and Wednesday.’
BBC News, 30th October 2018
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Widow sues DPD over courier husband’s death – The Guardian
‘The delivery company DPD is being sued over the death of a driver who collapsed after he missed hospital appointments because he feared the company’s practice of charging drivers £150 for missing work.’
The Guardian, 13th September 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
Pimlico’s legacy for self-employed contractors – Law Society’s Gazette
‘The Supreme Court judgment in the Pimlico Plumbers case has been hailed as a victory for workers in the gig economy – and a blow for organisations that rely on large numbers of ‘self-employed’ contractors. In fact, the judgment largely confirms what we already knew – that employment status must be considered on the individual facts of each case and what happens on the ground is more important than the wording of the contract.’
Law Society's Gazette, 25th June 2018
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
Supreme Court rules on true employment status of a contractor in Pimlico Plumbers case – UK Human Rights Blog
‘The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Pimlico Plumbers Ltd’s appeal and upheld the Employment Tribunal’s ruling that the Respondent – Mr Smith – a plumbing and heating engineer had been:
(a) a “worker” within the meaning of section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996;
(b) a “worker” within the meaning of regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833)
(c) in Pimlico’s “employment” within the meaning of section 83(2)(a) of the Equality Act.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
