The Highland Council

Case Summary

Three professional musicians (a piper, fiddle player, and accordionist) claimed unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, holiday pay, and failure to provide statements of employment particulars against The Highland Council. The tribunal held that while the claimants were not employees, they were 'workers' during the times they taught lessons at the National Centre of Excellence in Traditional Music, and therefore entitled to pursue holiday pay and statement of particulars claims.

The tribunal found that while the claimants lacked the requisite degree of personal service and control to be classified as employees, they were workers during the times they taught lessons because they undertook personal service when teaching, meeting the broad statutory definition of worker status. The claimants' claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were therefore dismissed as the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them, but their holiday pay and statement of particulars claims could proceed as worker claims.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claimants were 'employees' or 'workers' of the respondent
• •Personal service requirement
• •Control and integration of claimants into the organisation
• •Economic reality of the relationship
• •Substitution rights and discretion

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No:4103916/2025 Held inAberdeenon2 and 3March 2026 Employment JudgeSmith Mr L MacDougallFirstClaimant Represented by Mr P Morgan, Counsel Mr G GunnSecond Claimant Represented by Mr P Morgan, Counsel Mr S BrechinThird Claimant Represented by Mr P Morgan, Counsel The Highland CouncilRespondent Represented by Mr E Stafford, Solicitor RESERVED JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL 1.Theclaimants were not “employees” of therespondent. Accordingly, their claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal are dismissed. 2.Theclaimants were “workers” of therespondent during the times they taught lessons only. Accordingly, their holiday pay claims and claims in respect of a failure to provide a statement of employment particulars may proceed. 4103916/2025Page2 REASONS 1.Theclaimants presented claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal to the Tribunal, as well as for holiday pay (pursued as a wages claim unders.13 Employment Rights Act 1996or, in the alternative, a freestanding claim under theWorking Time Regulations 1998) and contingent claims in respect of a failure to provide a statement of employment particulars. 2.This preliminary hearing took place over two days and concerned the legal status of theclaimantsvis-a-vistherespondent, namely whether they were “employees” or “workers” of therespondent. The Tribunal would only have jurisdiction to entertain the full range of claims if they were found to be “employees”, and if they were found not to be, the holiday pay and statement of particulars claims as “workers”. Of course, if theclaimants failed to prove that they came within either category, all claims would necessarily have to be dismissed as the Tribunal would have no jurisdiction to hear them. 3.I was presented with a productions file in two volumes, spanning some 680 pages. I was taken to a very limited number of those documen…