Pimlico Plumbers v Smith: A Limited Substitution Right May Not Be Enough
In Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith [2018] UKSC 29, Mr Smith was described as self-employed and had a limited ability to exchange work with another Pimlico operative.
The Supreme Court upheld the finding that he was still required to provide personal service. He could not send any suitable person of his own choosing; any replacement had to come from Pimlico’s existing workforce.
Key finding
A restricted right to pass work to another approved worker did not remove the obligation of personal performance.
Lesson
There is a significant difference between:
choosing, managing and paying your own substitute; and
asking another contractor-approved worker to cover your job.
Only the first is likely to resemble a genuine commercial right of substitution.
9 Views