Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions

January 24, 2024
Micheal James

Jurisdiction / Tag(s):

Introduction to Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions:

In the intricate realm of employment law, the case of Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1968) stands as a milestone, offering profound insights into the determination of employment status and its implications on National Insurance contributions. The crux of this legal saga revolved around the engagement of a driver by Ready Mixed Concrete for the delivery of concrete and the subsequent classification of this individual as either an independent contractor or an employee.

Against the backdrop of the mid-20th century, Ready Mixed Concrete found itself entangled in a legal dispute that would shape the contours of employment relationships and tax obligations. The classification of the driver’s employment status emerged as a central issue, holding substantial consequences for the National Insurance contributions the company would be required to make.

Facts of the Case:

Ready Mixed Concrete had entered into a contractual arrangement with a driver responsible for the delivery of concrete. The crux of the matter lay in the designation of this driver as an independent contractor, a classification that Ready Mixed Concrete asserted based on the terms stipulated in the contractual agreement. However, the tax authorities contested this characterization, arguing that the practical dynamics of the working relationship contradicted the formal contractual labels.

The tax authorities pointed to the fact that, despite the contractual assertion of the driver as an independent contractor, the day-to-day workings reflected features of an employer-employee relationship. Key to this argument was the provision of the driver’s vehicle and the ability to hire substitutes, aspects that the tax authorities contended were inconsistent with the autonomy expected of an independent contractor.

Legal Issues:

The primary legal issue at stake was the nuanced determination of the driver’s employment status. This required a thorough examination of the contractual terms, the actual working relationship, and the broader legal principles governing the classification of individuals in the employment context.

Crucial legal considerations included the degree of control exerted by Ready Mixed Concrete over the driver, the presence or absence of mutuality of obligation, and the level of independence exercised by the driver in the performance of his duties. The case, therefore, became a litmus test for evaluating the practical realities of the employment relationship against the formal contractual provisions.

Arguments Presented:

Ready Mixed Concrete vigorously presented its case, emphasizing the contractual provisions that designated the driver as an independent contractor. The company highlighted aspects of the contractual arrangement, such as the driver providing his vehicle, which aligned with the characteristics of an independent contractor relationship.

On the opposing side, the tax authorities advanced a counterargument, focusing on the actual dynamics of the working relationship. They contended that, despite the contractual assertions, the driver functioned more as an employee, as evidenced by the provision of his vehicle and the lack of true independence in the execution of his duties.

Court’s Decision:

The court’s decision in Ready Mixed Concrete offered a nuanced evaluation of the employment status conundrum. Lord Denning MR, delivering the judgment, considered the totality of the circumstances, emphasizing the need to look beyond mere contractual labels. The court found in favor of Ready Mixed Concrete, determining that the driver indeed operated as an independent contractor.

The decision rested on the assessment of control, mutuality of obligation, and the driver’s ability to provide substitutes. The court deemed these factors more indicative of an independent contractor relationship, absolving Ready Mixed Concrete from National Insurance contribution obligations for the driver.

Impact and Significance:

The Ready Mixed Concrete case left an enduring impact on employment law and the determination of employment status. The decision emphasized the importance of practical considerations over formal contractual labels when assessing whether an individual should be classified as an employee or an independent contractor. This precedent influenced subsequent cases, providing a guiding framework for courts to navigate the complexities of employment relationships.

The significance of Ready Mixed Concrete extended beyond the immediate parties involved, offering clarity in the evaluation of working arrangements. The case highlighted the dynamic nature of employment relationships and the need for a holistic approach that considers the actual working dynamics rather than relying solely on contractual designations.


In conclusion, Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1968) serves as a beacon in the evolution of employment law. The case’s comprehensive analysis of employment status considerations, coupled with its emphasis on practical realities, has had a lasting impact on legal discourse. As we reflect on this legal saga, it becomes evident that Ready Mixed Concrete continues to shape the contours of employment law, contributing to a nuanced understanding of the complexities inherent in classifying individuals as employees or independent contractors.

Why Choose Us:

Our Law Dissertation Topics stand out for their relevance, depth, and contemporary significance. Meticulously curated, they reflect current legal issues, ensuring academic and practical relevance. Covering diverse legal domains, our topics encourage in-depth exploration, critical analysis, and contribute to the evolving discourse within the legal field.

Cite This Work

Select a referencing style to export a reference for this article:

All Answers ltd, 'Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions' (, September 2012 ) <> accessed 23 April 2024
My, Law, Tutor. (September 2012 ). Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions. Retrieved from
"Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions." 9 2012. All Answers Ltd. 04 2024 <>.
"Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions." MyLawTutor., September 2012. Web. 23 April 2024. <>.
MyLawTutor. September 2012. Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions. [online]. Available from: [Accessed 23 April 2024].
MyLawTutor. Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [Internet]. September 2012. [Accessed 23 April 2024]; Available from:
<ref>{{cite web|last=Tutor |first=MyLaw |url= |title=Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions | |date=September 2012 |accessdate=23 April 2024 |location=UK, USA}}</ref>

Related Cases

Dick Bentley v Harold Smith

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to Dick Bentley v Harold Smith The world of contracts can be a complex one, especially when it comes to the interpretation of statements made during negotiations. Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd [1965] stands as a significant case in English contract law, offering valuable insights into the distinction between a […]

Performance Cars v Abraham

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to Performance Cars v Abraham Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham (1962) stands as a landmark case in English tort law, specifically regarding the concept of causation in negligence claims. This case study delves into the factual background, the legal issue at stake, the court’s decision and reasoning, and the lasting impact of the case […]

R v Hennessy – 1989

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to R v Hennessy – 1989 The criminal justice system grapples with complex issues when a defendant’s actions seem involuntary due to a medical condition. R v Hennessy (1989) stands as a significant case in English law, delving into the boundaries of the defense of automatism in the context of diabetic hypoglycemia. This case […]

go to top