This is very interesting. Just shows what can be achieved with a little spare time and patience.
Gradually the more people who overturn this the sooner this nonsense will end.
For some time now, I have been concerned that the workfare programme is illegal, particularly around the contract issue.
So with a bit of time on my hands today, I decided to look at this in some more detail. I should point out that I am by no means a legal expert, although I do have an interest in the law and deal with statutory legislation in my job.
A contract can be written, verbal or implied and the structure of a contract (as a minimum) must take the following form;
4) Mutual assent
5) capable parties
In Chadwick v Pioneer Private telephone Co Ltd  1 All ER 522 523D the judge said,
“a contract of service implies an obligation to serve and it comprises some degree of control by the master”
There can be no doubt that the work provider is the “master”…
View original post 593 more words