Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case lawLatest NewsGig economyEmployment contractsEmployment tribunals

Addison Lee drivers are workers, Court of Appeal confirms

by Ashleigh Webber 23 Apr 2021
by Ashleigh Webber 23 Apr 2021 Robert Evans / Alamy Stock Photo
Robert Evans / Alamy Stock Photo

Addison Lee drivers are workers, not self-employed, and are entitled to the national minimum wage and holiday pay, the Court of Appeal has confirmed.

The minicab firm has had its application to appeal against the rulings of the employment tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed, with Lord Justice Bean stating that it is unlikely to succeed following the recent Uber BV vs Aslam and Others judgment, in which the Supreme Court found Uber drivers are workers.

Employment status

Supreme Court: Uber drivers are workers

Court confirms Uber drivers’ status in France as employees

Uber ruling: what happens next?

In 2017, an employment tribunal found that Addison Lee drivers Mr Lange, Mr Olszewski and Mr Morahan were workers and should be paid while they were logged onto Addison Lee’s driver portal system.

It found there was an overarching contract between each claimant and Addison Lee, and that each time they logged on to the app the driver was undertaking to accept jobs allocated to them and to perform that work personally.

This judgment was upheld by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in 2018 and in 2019, Addison Lee was given permission to appeal the ruling, but only after the Uber v Aslam judgment was reached by the Supreme Court.

However, in a decision handed down yesterday, Lord Justice Bean said Addison Lee’s appeal should not proceed as it was unlikely to be successful.

The judgment says: “There is no arguable error in the finding of the ET, upheld by the EAT, that in the present case the claimants were limb (b) workers. Now that the Supreme Court in Uber has emphatically reaffirmed the Autoclenz principle, there is no longer a reasonable prospect of success in overturning that finding in the present case and there is no compelling reason why this appeal should proceed further.”

Law firm Leigh Day, which represents more than 100 Addison Lee drivers, believes thousands of drivers could be entitled to an average of £10,000 in compensation, but only if they bring a claim.

Liana Wood, employment solicitor at Leigh Day, said: “This is a huge decision in favour of Addison Lee drivers and yet another blow to big firms operating in the gig economy.

“Leigh Day has been fighting for workers’ rights on behalf of our clients for several years, so I’m delighted that the end is now finally in sight for these hard-working drivers who deserve to be treated fairly.

“This decision follows hot on the heels of the landmark Uber judgment in the Supreme Court. At Leigh Day we hope that other companies with similar business models to Uber and Addison Lee recognise that they cannot continue to deny people basic rights such as holiday pay and the national minimum wage.”

We hope that other companies with similar business models to Uber and Addison Lee recognise that they cannot continue to deny people basic rights such as holiday pay and the national minimum wage” – Liana Wood, Leigh Day

Addison Lee driver David Bollard, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, said: “It’s not just the financial side, it’s also the recognition that the way they treat their workers isn’t right.

“I worked for Addison Lee for more than four years and over that time the treatment of drivers seemed to get worse.

“There’s a revolving door of drivers which means they don’t really care about you as individuals because you’re easily replaced.”

Steve Garelick, regional organiser at the GMB union, said: “Addison Lee had ample opportunity to do the right thing by drivers and sit down and talk with GMB about ensuring their workers were treated within the law. They chose instead to pay lawyers to try and argue the impossible.

“This judgment is not based just on law but good common sense and sends a further message to those who would continue to exploit workers through a bogus self-employment model.”

Addison Lee has been contacted for a response.

HR Director opportunities on Personnel Today

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.


Browse more HR director jobs

HR Director opportunities on Personnel Today

Browse more HR director jobs

Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is a former editor of OHW+ and former HR and wellbeing editor at Personnel Today. Ashleigh's areas of interest include employee health and wellbeing, equality and inclusion and skills development. She has hosted many webinars for Personnel Today, on topics including employee retention, financial wellbeing and menopause support.

previous post
Foxtons investors rally against chief executive bonus
next post
OHW+ Your questions answered

1 comment

Ravi Peiris 24 Apr 2021 - 6:12 am

If the Court of Appeal followed the Uber Supreme Court Judgement it must be clarified that the Supreme Court in Uber never held that the drivers were NOT self employed. The Supreme Court held that the drivers were “workers” under limb (iii) of section 230 (3) of the Employment rights Act and therefore they were entitled to the benefits.
In other words these drivers were “Dependant Contractors” who were not independent but nevertheless not employees either.

Comments are closed.

You may also like

Zero-hours workers’ rights to be extended from beyond...

8 May 2025

Bank holidays: six things employers need to know

2 May 2025

Employment Rights Bill must be tightened to protect...

1 May 2025

Court of Appeal hears Ryanair pilot’s worker status...

1 Apr 2025

Working when the clocks go forward: how should...

30 Mar 2025

Employment Rights Bill: Agency workers and zero-hours contracts...

5 Mar 2025

What lies ahead for IR35 and worker status?

25 Feb 2025

Zero-hours workers ‘stuck’ in long-term arrangements

3 Feb 2025

Storm Éowyn: Five common employer queries about severe...

24 Jan 2025

Recruiting seasonal workers: what does the future hold?

20 Jan 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+