Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

This case concerns the employment status of an equity partner, specifically relating to whether she could be considered a “worker” for the her whistleblowing claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The facts in Clyde & Co Llp v Winkelhof

Mrs Winklehof commenced employment with Shadbolts (a law firm) as a solicitor in 2005 and was seconded to Tazmania, where she worked (among others) for a Tanzanian law firm, Ako Law. The managing partner of Ako law was at all times Mr Ongwamuhana (“Kibuta”). She transferred her employment to Clyde & Co (“the First Respondent”), another well-known law firm, on 21 February 2010, whereupon she became an equity member of the firm.

Mrs Winklehof became aware in November 2010 of potentially illegal activities engaged in by Kibuta and reported this to the Respondent’s Money Laundering Officers on 23 and 24 November 2010. She was dismissed by Ako Law on 25 November 2010 and suspended by the First Respondent on the same day. She was ‘dismissed’ by the Respondent on 6 January 2011 and subsequently brought claims at the Employment Tribunal for, among other things, sex discrimination and detriment because of her protected disclosure.

The law relating to the employment status of equity members (and partners generally)

Under s.230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 a worker is an individual who works (or used to work) under either a contract of employment or any other contract (express or implied, oral or written) where the individual undertakes to do or perform personally any work or services for another party to the contract whose status is not by virtue of the contract that of a client or customer of any profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual.

It has been established that partners can be “limb (a)” workers (or ‘employees’) for the purposes of protection against unfair dismissal (for example, the cases of Kovats v TFO Management LLP and Tiffin v Lester Aldridge LLP) but the situation presented here was, on the facts, a novel one – the question of whether a partner or equity member could be a “limb (b) worker” for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 had not been addressed before.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgment in Clyde & Co Llp v Winkelhof

An Employment Judge had initially struck out Mrs Winkelhof’s claim at a Pre-Hearing Review on the basis that she was not a “limb (b)” “worker” and therefore could not claim for detriment due to the protected disclosure she had made. The Employment Judge accepted that she was operating under a contract of employment, that she was personally providing services related to that contract, and that the services provided were to another party to the contract. However, the Employment Judge considered that Clyde & Co LLP was a client of the Claimant’s and she was therefore excluded from claiming.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal rejected this analysis. It considered that the First Respondent was not a client or customer of the Claimant as she was in a “subordinate position” (see Byrne Brothers v Baird. The Employment Appeal Tribunal therefore concluded that an equity member or partner can, dependent on the facts of the matter, be a “limb (b)” “worker” for the purpose of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and therefore qualify for protection from detriment because of a protected disclosure (or “whistleblowing”).

Our specialist employment solicitors’ view on Clyde & Co Llp v Winkelhof

This is an interesting and, as the Employment Appeal Tribunal noted, novel case. The conclusion of the Employment Appeal Tribunal appears to be a just and correct one in the circumstances – the First Respondent on the facts did not appear to have been a client of the Claimant’s. This conclusion was supported by the fact that the Claimant had been specifically recruited by the First Respondent and that she was in a subordinate position (i.e. unable to exercise unfettered discretion) in her workplace.

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog.

Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.52 Average

21 Reviews

Redman's provided excellent legal employment advice for me during a difficult time in my employment. Chris was my lawyer, super efficient, quick, reliable and clearly very experienced in the matter. Could not ask for a better law firm to deal with your query if you are in need of some help. Would definitely use them again in the future. Highly recommending Chris.

Posted 1 month ago

Steven

Chris Hadrill was very professional and responsive. I would highly recommend him

Posted 1 month ago

Dinah

Very Efficient, with very quick email reply’s. I had a matter that needed resolving within a very short space of time and Redmans Solicitors were great with dealing with my matter quickly.

Posted 1 month ago

Ankar

At Redmans the solicitor that was dealing with me was Chris. He dealt with my situation smoothly with clear guidance and explanation

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Clear, concise advice and guidance delivered by an experienced and very capable solicitor, within the timelines required

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very efficient service. I never had to wIt for more than a day for a reply to any of my queries and the matter was dealt with swiftly.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very timely, thorough and helpful advice. Friendly and considerate of the needs of the client

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Very prompt and attention to detail. Thank you for the service

Posted 2 months ago

Chris

Couldn’t be happier with how Redmans successfully handled our seemingly tricky case. By being clear and detailed every step of the way, with the utmost professionalism and courtesy, they made it an informative and eye-opening process, taking the stress out of the situation and ultimately delivered what you would want from such a service. I fully appreciate everything they have done, and if I am ever in need of such services in the future, they will be the first number I contact. Excellent.

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Excellent work delivered with great quality

Posted 2 months ago

Dominic

Chris Hadrill was a great help both in terms of his advice and his expertise. He explained my options to me clearly and concisely enabling me to quickly make the right decision for me in the circumstance. I would not hesitate to recommend Chris or Redmans to friends or colleagues, and would certainly make Redmans my first port of call should I require a similar service in the future.

Posted 2 months ago

Kurt

Redmans gave excellent advice and helped me understand everything in clear concepts. Thank you!

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Resolved my issues

Posted 2 months ago

Keith

Quick fast professional service.

Posted 2 months ago

Michael

"Prompt, efficient and practical advice that resulted in me getting some additional money tax free."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Patient and thorough advice given to me around my Settlement Agreement

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

"Excellent service, getting back to you promptly giving you very good advice."

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

I found Chris Hadrill to be an excellent help, he is very knowledgeable and gives good ,concise ,strategic advice .He makes himself readily accessible when you need him.I would personally highly recommend him.

Posted 2 months ago

Christine

Professional, efficient and reliable service provided. I strongly recommend them and I would use this service again.

Posted 2 months ago