<get the last word in> placeholder
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Substitution???
Collapse
X
-
-
the validity of any substitution clause is key in the CEST assessment and also in those of QDOS et al. So, the courts might not place the utmost of importance on it, but CEST and QDOS certainly do.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostNo.
And there will never be one. A case will not hinge on one point alone. It's too complex and a multitude of factors will need to be consider to make a judgement. I would have though if there was anyone on gods earth that would know this it would be you.
And another point, it's also even more unlikely to happen as substitution is less important as the other pillars, judges have commented on it and even Kate Cottrell has admitted it as so.
Anything to add to this thread that's useful now JtB or are you done?Comment
-
-
If you told the client that you will be off for a few days and have not sent a substitute, then most likely that invalidates the clause (according to guidance).Comment
-
A sub for 6 days? Really?Originally posted by elsergiovolador View PostIf you told the client that you will be off for a few days and have not sent a substitute, then most likely that invalidates the clause (according to guidance).'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!
Comment
-
I know, crazy. It seems like the rules are created so that they can say it doesn't affect freelancers, but in reality it makes running a company that provides services next to impossible.Originally posted by northernladuk View PostA sub for 6 days? Really?
Another one I like is the one that says when you build a project that integrates with client other systems, then that automatically means you work under direction. The same if the client has any standards that projects need to adhere to, e.g. 12 factor.
That's why HMRC is so fixated on their wrong interpretation of MOO, as all this nonsense hinges on that. One can hope their PGMOL appeal gets rejected.Comment
-
What says that?Originally posted by elsergiovolador View PostAnother one I like is the one that says when you build a project that integrates with client other systems, then that automatically means you work under direction. The same if the client has any standards that projects need to adhere to, e.g. 12 factor.Comment
-
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- VAT compliance checks are changing — here’s what contractors need to know Jun 17 07:30
- As HMRC steps up VAT compliance activity, how should company directors prepare? Jun 16 06:52
- Hiring of IT contractors returned to growth in May 2026, following 33 months ‘in the red’ Jun 15 06:02
- Zero Hours Contract Reform: A key consultation for recruiters, employers and contractors is finally here Jun 12 04:43
- Bills of Exchange: Here’s what caught my attention as an umbrella compliance expert Jun 11 03:46
- Loan charge recall issue returns, with new demands making UK contractors ‘half-suicidal’ Jun 10 03:58
- AI interviews are here. Here's how IT contractors can ace them Jun 9 06:53
- Closing your limited company isn't failure. It's just the end of a chapter. Jun 8 05:00
- Young people not in education, employment or training isn’t a contractor’s problem. It’s a problem for us all Jun 5 05:26
- How does HMRC’s forward interest change benefit contractors? Jun 4 04:22

Comment