Search

How can we help?

Icon

Deliveroo: Late substitution leads to a win against the run of play

The Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) has finally given its decision on whether a particular group of Deliveroo riders – those in the Camden/Kentish Town area of North London who are paid per delivery – are workers of Deliveroo or are independent suppliers of services to Deliveroo.

The hearing was in May 2017. As we noted at the time, shortly beforehand Deliveroo had changed its rider contracts, removing prohibitions on riders carrying out deliveries for other companies and the requirement to wear Deliveroo-branded clothing or to give notice of termination.

Although this group of riders’ claim to be Deliveroo’s workers was made in order to establish their right to seek collective representation by a union, essentially the same definition of worker is also used for entitlement to receive national minimum wage, holiday pay and sick pay.

The question of whether Deliveroo deliberately engineered the new contractual terms to prevent a finding that riders are workers is not relevant. What is relevant is identifying the contractual terms the parties agreed in the written contracts and by their working practices.

Crucially, the CAC found that (a) under the new contracts riders are permitted to engage a substitute to carry out deliveries, (b) in fact they sometimes do so and (c) there is no penalty from Deliveroo if they do. An individual who is not required to perform the work personally, cannot meet the legal definition of worker so the CAC decided that these riders are not Deliveroo’s workers.

While this goes against the recent trend of high-profile gig economy decisions such as Uber and CitySprint, this is because the working arrangements for this group of Deliveroo riders is different to those cases.

The question of whether Deliveroo deliberately engineered the new contractual terms to prevent a finding that riders are workers is not relevant.

It is equally important to note that the CAC made no finding as to whether these Deliveroo riders were workers under their previous contracts. If they were, they could bring tribunal claims (within 3 months) for national minimum wage/national living wage, holiday pay and sick pay or civil court claims (within 6 years) for national minimum wage/national living wage only. There is also the risk of individuals referring this to HMRC, which has sweeping powers to order back payments and impose punitive fines.

The riders in the Deliveroo case were not claiming to have been employees with rights to make claims for unfair dismissal or redundancy payments but this is likely to be the next frontier in claims against gig economy companies.

In addition, any business seeking to restructure in order to emulate Deliveroo should proceed with caution. If such changes have the effect of terminating the employment of 20 or more employeesthe business could end up with very serious legal and financial liabilities under collective consultation obligations .

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

Pub
  • 15 July 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

Preparing your professional services firm for sale

In our latest podcast, join Stuart Mullins and Nicky Goringe Larkin as they explore the complexities of valuing and preparing professional services firms for the market, whether for sale, merger, venture, or fundraising.

art
  • 15 July 2025
  • Employment

Employment law reform: UK Government launches review of parental leave and pay

On 1 July 2025, the Government announced that it would be conducting a full review of parental leave and pay, which includes maternity and paternity leave; parental leave; shared parental leave; adoption leave and others.

Pub
  • 14 July 2025
  • Privacy and Data Protection

From legislation to implementation: The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025

In this podcast, our data protection experts, Melanie Pimenta and Harry Berryman, will explain what the Act means for your organisation and how to ensure compliance with the new regulations.

art
  • 11 July 2025
  • Employment

Silenced No More: The Future of NDAs in UK Employment Law

On 8 July 2025, the government announced plans to put forward measures to ban the use of Non-Disclosure Agreements (“NDAs”) to silence employees subjected to harassment or discrimination.

art
  • 08 July 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

Share buybacks and what to do when they are void!

A share buyback is when a company purchases its own shares from a shareholder. However, for a limited company to successfully purchase its own shares, it must comply with Part 18 of the Companies Act (CA) 2006.

art
  • 07 July 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Climate change risks in property transactions

Climate change is starting to affect our lives to a greater extent than experienced before. Extreme weather events such as floods, droughts and heatwaves are becoming a frequent occurrence.