Classification: employee

(b) Following CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd (2022) (the "Construct" case), the High Court held that where parties have committed their relationship to a comprehensive written contract that is not a sham or otherwise impugned, the characterisation of the relationship as one of employment or independent contracting is to be determined by reference to the legal rights and obligations established by that contract — not by subsequent conduct or a multifactorial assessment of how the relationship operated in practice. The traditional "control" and "integration" indicia remain relevant, but they are assessed by examining the terms of the contract itself: here, the contractual rights to direct what work is done, when and where it is done, and how it is performed, combined with the absence of any genuine business, capital, equipment or right of delegation, point to an employment relationship, regardless of the contractual label "self-employed contractor". (The companion case ZG Operations Pty Ltd v Jamsek (2022) confirmed the same primacy-of-contract approach.)

(c) Practical consequence: the engaging business will be liable for employee entitlements and statutory obligations it might otherwise have avoided — e.g. superannuation guarantee contributions, PAYG withholding, workers' compensation cover, payroll tax, and National Employment Standards/award entitlements (leave, minimum wages, notice of termination) — with associated back-pay and penalty exposure if it had treated him as a contractor.