In Stringfellow Restaurants Ltd v Quashie the Court of Appeal ruled that a lap dancer was not an employee and, therefore, unable to pursue an unfair dismissal claim. The essential ingredient to give rise to an employment relationship was missing, i.e. the mutuality of obligation on the employer to provide and pay for work and for theindividual to accept that work. Stringfellows was under no obligation to pay Quashie anything. She negotiated her own dance prices with customers, who paid her directly, and risked being out of pocket on any given night, because she also had to pay the club for using its facilities. In the Court's view, it would be unusual to find an employment relationship where the individual is paid exclusively by third parties and takes such an economic risk. This conclusion was reinforced by the terms of the dancer's contract, under which the parties clearly intended self-employed status.
This case confirms: (i) the need to ensure that the express terms of a contract, both written and oral, reflect the true nature of the working relationship; (ii) that in practice the contract must operate in the way intended; (iii) that for a contract of employment to exist, there must be a mutuality of obligation to provide work and to perform the work provided – the “wage-work” bargain.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
