- Appeal Dismissed and Costs Ordered:
- The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay costs to the respondents for a standard appeal on a band A basis, with usual disbursements. (Goddard J)
- Employee vs. Independent Contractor:
- The central question was whether Uber drivers are employees of one or more of the Uber companies for the purposes of New Zealand employment law, as concluded by the Employment Court, or independent providers of transportation services. (Goddard J)
- Test for Employee Status:
- The test for whether a worker is an employee under the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) is set out in s 6 of that Act, which requires determining the real nature of the relationship between the worker and the employer. (Goddard J)
- Platform Economy and ERA:
- The platform economy involves new ways of working, and the test in s 6 of the ERA must be applied with a realistic appreciation of these new ways. However, the test remains the same, and it is for Parliament to decide whether vulnerable platform workers should have protections under the ERA. (Goddard J)
- Court’s Conclusion on Employment Status:
-
- The Court concluded that the four drivers were employees of one or more companies in the Uber group when logged into the Uber driver app, emphasizing that if a worker is properly classified as an employee, it is not possible to contract out of the protections provided by the ERA merely because the employment is through an online platform provider.
Source Court of Appeal New Zealand
