The company delivered concrete, but had a policy of hiring independent contractor businesses to do the haulage because according to their policy documents, this allows "speedy and efficient cartage, the maintenance of trucks in good condition, and the careful driving thereof, and would benefit the owner-driver by giving him an incentive to work for a higher return without abusing the vehicle in the way which often happens if an employee is given a bonus scheme related to the use of his employer's vehicle.

"However they had become dissatisfied with their contractors and had started offering the jobs to current staff, with a set-up for hire-purchase for people to buy their own Leyland lorries (through a related company called "Ready Mixed Finance Ltd").

The case went to the High Court and MacKenna J disagreed, saying that Latimer was a 'small business man' so working under contract for services.

He considered case law from around the world on the matter, including Queensland Stations Pty Ltd v. Federal Commissioners of Taxation 70 C.L.R.

(i) The servant agrees that, in consideration of a wage or other remuneration, he will provide his own work and skill in the performance of some service for his master.

(ii) He agrees, expressly or impliedly, that in the performance of that service he will be subject to the other's control in a sufficient degree to make that other master.

Freedom to do a job either by one's own hands or by another's is inconsistent with a contract of service, though a limited or occasional power of delegation may not be: see Atiyah's Vicarious Liability in the Law of Torts (1967) pp.

All these aspects of control must be considered in deciding whether the right exists in a sufficient degree to make one party the master and the other his servant.

561, 571To find where the right resides one must look first to the express terms of the contract, and if they deal fully with the matter one may look no further.

If the contract does not expressly provide which party shall have the right, the question must be answered in the ordinary way by implication.

The third and negative condition is for my purpose the important one, and I shall try with the help of five examples to explain what I mean by provisions inconsistent with the nature of a contract of service.

(ii) A contract obliges one party to carry another's goods, providing at his own expense everything needed for performance.

(iv) A contract obliges one party to work for the other, accepting his control, and to provide his own transport.

An obligation to do work subject to the other party's control is a necessary, though not always a sufficient, condition of a contract of service.