½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

No single test for employment status can ever be conclusive. In any complicated case there is bound to be some tension between those factors which point to employment and those which point away from it. As more and more non-tax cases are brought into consideration the position becomes more difficult because the motivation for arguing for employed status may be quite different in a non-tax environment.

Note for example the case of Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung¹ where a stonemason who had always been treated as self-employed was injured at work and claimed to be an employee in order to obtain compensation from his 'employer'. This would not have been available to a self-employed individual. The Privy Council decided in his favour.

HMRC's internal Employment Status Manual² confirms that HMRC's approach to questions of employment status largely involves weighing up all of the factors. Commentary in the manual³ states that following Hall v Lorimer⁴:

'… having obtained all the relevant information, the object is to stand back and determine