Drivers engaged by the appellant partnership to make deliveries using the appellant’s lorries were employees of the appellant rather than self-employed contractors.
The appellant partnership provided haulage services to its customers, involving the delivery of aggregates from its customers’ sites to the location where the materials were to be used. The appellant entered into ‘franchise agreements’ with its customers, under which the appellant could provide its services through ‘franchisee’s substitutes’ approved to carry out the delivery services.
There were no written contracts between the appellant and its drivers. Typically, customers would tell the appellant how many lorries were needed the next day for deliveries, and their destination. The appellant would then contact drivers (from a pool of potential drivers) by telephone, and offer them a particular delivery job. Drivers who
