Media Employment Lawyers: Empowering Businesses and Workers

We provide comprehensive employment law services tailored to meet the needs of both employers and employees.  

 For Employers 

Employment Contracts and Agreements: We draft, review, and negotiate contracts to ensure clarity, compliance, and protection for your business. 

Redundancy and Termination Advice: We guide you through redundancy processes and terminations, ensuring compliance with employment law while minimising risks. 

Dispute Resolution and Litigation: We provide strategic advice and representation in employment disputes, including mediation, arbitration, and tribunal claims. 

Compliance and Risk Management: We help you stay compliant with employment law, reducing the risk of disputes and claims. 

For Employees 

Contract Review and Negotiation: We help you understand and negotiate the terms of your employment contract to ensure your rights are protected. 

Dispute Resolution: If you are facing a workplace dispute, we provide expert advice and representation, whether through mediation, arbitration, or tribunal claims. 

Employee Rights and Benefits: We offer in-depth advice on discrimination, maternity/paternity rights, and workplace entitlements. 

Unfair Dismissal and Redundancy: We provide strong legal support to protect your rights and secure the best outcome if you have been treated unfairly. 

Autoclenz Ltd v. Belcher (2011) 

The case revolves around the classification of car valeters working for Autoclenz Ltd as either self-employed individuals, employees, or limb (b) workers under section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In this situation, 20 car valeters claimed their status entitled them to statutory employment rights, while Autoclenz maintained they were self-employed. The crux of the issue lay in a 2007 contract that the valeters were required to sign, which Autoclenz argued clarified their employment status. The Employment Tribunal initially classified the valeters as employees, and on appeal, while the Employment Appeal Tribunal recognised them as limb (b) workers, the Court of Appeal ultimately affirmed the Employment Tribunal's view, noting that the written contract did not truly represent the nature of the relationship between the parties. Key findings included that the valeters had no control over their working conditions, were effectively managed by Autoclenz, and had an obligation to perform their work personally. Ultimately, the Court of Appeal upheld the conclusion that the 'true nature' of the relationship suggested the valeters were employees, dismissing Autoclenz's appeal. This case underscores the importance of working arrangements over a contract's written terms, particularly in employment law.

Uber BV v. Aslam (2021) 

This landmark case ruled that Uber drivers are workers, not independent contractors, entitling them to rights such as minimum wage and paid holidays. The court focused on Uber's level of control over its drivers and rejected the "self-employment" label. The parameters between employed and self-employed continues to evolve.