Simply Learning Tutor Agency Ltd & Ors v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

The statutory concept of employment in section 13 of the Employment Agencies Act 1973 is deliberately broad. It includes people who personally provide services to a third party as independent contractors or on a self-employed basis. Common-law distinctions between contracts of service and contracts for services do not control the statutory scheme.

A business acting as an intermediary between people offering services and people needing them will usually fall within the statutory definitions of employment agency or employment business. The protective purpose of the Act and the Conduct Regulations supports that construction.

The claimant tutor-introduction companies introduced self-employed tutors to parents and collected tuition payments before passing them to the tutors. They sought a declaration that their arrangements fell outside the Employment Agencies Act 1973 and the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003.

The Secretary of State argued that the issue was fact-sensitive and unsuitable for determination in judicial review proceedings. The court considered both the appropriateness of granting a declaration and the construction of “employment” in section 13(1) of the Act.

1. The claim was not merely hypothetical. There was a genuine dispute about the application of the statutory regime, with substantial regulatory and financial consequences. Waiting for enforcement proceedings was not a suitable alternative remedy. The claimants had standing and it was appropriate to make a declaration.
2. The natural meaning of “employment” in the Employment Agencies Act 1973 is wide and compendious. It includes ordinary employment under a contract of service and work personally supplied under a contract for services or on a self-employed basis.
3. The statutory definitions of “employment agency” and “employment business” apply specifically for the purposes of the Act and displace narrower common-law meanings. The reasoning in Department of Trade & Industry v Webster & others was adopted as reflecting the natural reading of section 13. Accenture Services Ltd v Revenue & Customs Commissioners was explained in its context.
4. The protective purpose of the Act and the Conduct Regulations supports the broad construction. The scheme protects work-seekers, hirers and vulnerable persons. A business holding itself out as an intermediary between a person needing services and a person offering them will usually fall within the regime.
5. The claim was refused. The court declared that section 13(1) includes persons, including tutors, who provide services on a self-employed basis as independent contractors, and that the statutory meanings of employment agency and employment business must be construed accordingly.