The Cout of Appeal has, this morning, handed down its judgment in Cable & Wireless v Muscat.
Upholding the EAT and ET, the Court of Appeal affirmed the principles in Dacas v Brook Street Bureau that an agency worker could be an implied employee (and, on the facts in Cable & Wireless, was an employee) of an end-user in a tripartite agency/worker/end-user case.
The judgment of Smith LJ is well worth reading: she neatly disposes of all the criticisms made of the Dacas case (including the oft-cited criticism that the Court of Appeal in Dacas did not consider that contracts can, in this circumstance, only be implied on grounds of necessity).
Cable and Wireless v Muscat
[Thanks to Caroline Shimmin of Steele Raymond, who successfully represented Mr Muscat, for sending me the judgment]