%20(1).webp)
William Slivinsky PTech.NALP Business Legal AdviserNALP Membership No: 30244ICO: ZB988076
Business legal advice employment
Business legal advice employment matters if your business operates with subcontractors, self-employed contractors or a flexible workforce. The right legal structure — and more importantly, the real working relationship behind it — can protect your business from costly worker-status, limb (b) or employment-status claims.
Legal support is available from the start-up stage through to day-to-day advice, document drafting, contractor agreements, procedures, communication and tribunal defence. This page also presents important employment-status cases involving my work, showing how these disputes are argued and what businesses should consider before problems arise.
My Key Case on Employment Status
Employment-status risk is commonly underestimated by business owners. Even where a person is CIS registered, submits their own tax return, receives no normal employment benefits, and is free to accept work elsewhere, those factors may still not prevent a finding of worker status.
In Mr M Nowotnik v Cedar Construction Services Limited, Case Number 2601835/2024, Mr W Slivinsky represented the claimant in a preliminary hearing on employment status. The issue was whether the claimant was genuinely self-employed or a limb (b) worker under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal recorded that Mr Slivinsky represented the claimant as consultant and that it considered his written skeleton argument, witness evidence and oral submissions.
The case is important for business owners because it shows that the legal label is not the end of the matter. A business may call someone self-employed, subcontracted or CIS registered, but the Tribunal can still examine the real relationship, including personal service, integration, control, substitution, payment arrangements and whether the business was truly a client or customer of an independent business undertaking.
A key issue was substitution. It was suggested that the claimant could send someone else to work in his place. However, the judgment records that “when pressed by Mr Slivinsky”, the evidence did not show a genuine right to send a substitute, but only the ability to suggest someone who might help the respondent if needed.
The Tribunal ultimately found that the claimant was a worker under section 230(3)(b) ERA 1996. For business owners, the lesson is clear: written documents matter, but they must match the real working relationship. If the day-to-day arrangement suggests personal service, integration and dependency, the business may face costly worker-status or employment-status claims.
Read the full judgment:
Mr M Nowotnik v Cedar Construction Services Limited — Employment Status Judgment
From Employment-Status Disputes to Better Business Protection
Employment-status disputes are widespread, especially in businesses that rely on subcontractors, self-employed contractors or flexible labour.
Many disputes do not begin because a business deliberately acts unlawfully. They often arise because the legal structure, written documents, communication and real working relationship were never properly aligned.
After acting in these disputes, my work has moved towards helping businesses prevent the problem before it becomes a tribunal claim. This is more proactive, more commercially sensible and often better for both sides.
The aim is simple: clear legal foundations, properly drafted documents, practical procedures and working relationships that support the structure your business wants to rely on.