Macfarlane v Glasgow CC [2001] IRLR 7
Judgement for the case Macfarlane v Glasgow CC
Table Of Contents
Plaintiffs were gym instructors who were obliged to work, but were allowed to provide a substitute from a register when they were ‘unable’ (not merely unwilling) to work.
CA held that the matter had to be redetermined (it wasn’t ruling on whether Plaintiff was an employee-probably not due to casual nature of work - but rather whether the claim had to fail on the basis of the substitution clause).
-
Following Tanton, a limited power of delegation was not inconsistent with a contract of service. The substitution clause in Tanton was extreme, since it could be exercised whenever Plaintiff wanted, whereas here it was only when the worker was unable to work.
Also in Tanton anyone could be a substitute and was paid by Plaintiff, whereas here the substitute was arranged by Glasgow CC and was paid directly by them. – Lindsay J
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Macfarlane v Glasgow CC
Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Labour Law | Personal Scope Of Labour Law Notes (36 pages) |
| Labour Law | The Employment Relationship Notes (71 pages) |
Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.