Ex-Stringfellows dancer set to appeal Court of Appeal Judgment
Date: 21 December 2012
Nadine Quashie, a former dancer with Stringfellow Restaurants Limited is set to appeal today’s Court of Appeal decision which reverses the Employment Appeal Tribunal finding where Ms Quashie had won her legal battle for employment rights.
Earlier this year the EAT confirmed that Ms Quashie had satisfied the minimum requirements for a contract of employment to exist; namely, there was an element of control and personal service and in particular there was a mutual obligation between Ms Quashie and Stringfellows to provide and do work. The decision went on to find that Ms Quashie was an employee on each night that she worked at the club and that there was also an ‘umbrella contract’ between these periods.
Lord Justice Elias in the Court of Appeal disagreed with the EAT’s conclusion and upheld an appeal by Stringfellows, restoring the original Employment Tribunal finding that Ms Quashie was not an ‘employee’.
In reaching his decision, Lord Justice Elias accepted that despite the Tribunal confusing the concept of mutual obligations, the Tribunal was correct in finding there was a contract in existence between the parties. In considering the nature of the contractual obligations, however, Lord Justice Elias, with the agreement of Lord Justices Ward and Pitchford, found that there were not sufficient obligations to create a contract of employment.
The judgment is a disappointment both for Ms Quashie and the industry as a whole. Ms Quashie was believed to be the first dancer to have succeeded in claiming employment rights and protection. This decision today will have an impact on the employment rights of thousands of club dancers across the UK who will be unable to bring claims against their ‘employers’ despite working under their control.
In a decision that could have bought better regulation and ensured better working conditions for dancers across the country, her solicitor Shah Qureshi of Bindmans LLP said:
“Nadine is extremely disappointed both for herself and the thousands of dancers that could be affected by this judgment. She is considering an appeal to the Supreme Court as she continues to be of the view that there was an employment relationship. She worked in exchange for payment, there were mutual obligations between the parties and Stringfellows exerted a high degree of control over her work.”
After the judgment Nadine Quashie said:
“I am saddened by the judgment but will continue to seek justice and better regulation in the industry. The status quo where dancers are denied their basic employment rights cannot continue. I was obliged to attend work and Stringfellows were obliged to pay me. I think it is common sense that I was employed by them.”