Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Macfarlane v Glasgow CC

[2001] IRLR 7

Case summary last updated at 20/02/2020 18:50 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Macfarlane v Glasgow CC

Ps 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 P 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 P 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 P, whereas here the substitute was arranged by Glasgow CC and was paid directly by them. –Lindsay J

Macfarlane v Glasgow CC crops up in following areas of law