Don’t forget the basics!


- a 'Freelance Informer' legal article from Roger Sinclair


I've noticed a tendency on the part of some contractors in recent times when considering the terms of a new contract to focus solely on IR35 related factors, but to be far less concerned about the basic commercial aspects of the relationship.  This in my view is potentially dangerous.

 

The core issue is this:  whilst getting the IR35 angles wrong can lose you 25-35 percent of your income, making too many compromises on the basic commercial issues can lose you 100 percent.  It's worth having a review of what those basic commercial issues are, and of how we should normally expect them to be covered.

 

1    A clear statement of what you will be doing, which accurately reflects your own understanding of (so far at least as is practicable) the precise nature of the services you will be providing, including not only the 'what', but also the 'where' and the 'when' – the more accurately the contract specifies these items, the less risk there is of things going wrong because of misunderstanding, or because of a gap between expectations (on either side) and reality.

 

2    Payment terms need to be clear.  They should always state that the rate is VAT exclusive.  Where the rate is a daily rate it should be clear how many hours (or what bracket of hours) are expected in return.  It should be clear when you are and are not entitled to charge for additional hours.  The invoicing frequency (weekly, monthly, or whatever) and the credit period (time from invoice until payment) must be stated.  You need to have certainty as to the date on which to expect payment, and to be able to know on what date any payment due from the agency will become overdue, so that you can take any appropriate action.  Any terms which may appear to give the agency the right to withhold payments or set-off any claims they may think they have against you should certainly be firmly resisted.

 

3    Termination provisions also need to be clear;  it is of course right that both parties should have the right in all but very short contracts to terminate early on notice and without fault part of the other.  This is a perfectly reasonable commercial provision, and apart from the obvious fact that it allows either party to end the contract early in an orderly way in the event of unforeseen circumstances, it also puts a ceiling on the damages for which either party will be liable in many cases of breach of contract resulting in early termination. 

 

It is also right that either party should have the right to terminate without notice in the event of material breach of contract on the part of the other - including any failure by the agency to pay within seven days of the due date. 

 

Beyond that, my own feeling is that other provisions allowing for termination without notice are generally unreasonable.  Often one sees terms which appear to allow the agency the right to terminate without notice in case of ‘misconduct’, ‘failure to comply with Client's rules’, and a long list of petty misdemeanours and other grounds.  The answer to the agency asking for such terms should be to say that to the extent that such things may amount to a material breach of contract, they already have the right to terminate under the 'termination for material breach' provision - and to the extent that they do not, they are not accepted as reasonable grounds for termination without notice. 

 

The other point to be wary of here is terms which allow for termination without notice if the agency's contract with the client ends.  Accepting this term can create a coach-and-horses-sized hole in the 'termination on notice' provisions, because it effectively gives client the right to cause the contract to end early without notice and without cause - precisely what we're trying to avoid.  Such a term should be resisted, and the contractor's position should be that the contractor would expect proper notice if the client wished to terminate early in the absence of fault on the part of the contractor.

 

4    Terms which operate to restrict what a contractor can do after the contract has ended should be carefully scrutinized.  Such terms should neither be too broad in scope nor too long in duration.  Contractors should resist accepting restrictions which lasts longer after the end of the contract than the duration of the contract itself, or which seek to restrict the contractor from dealing with anyone other than the client itself.  In an ideal world, the restriction itself will make clear that the restriction will cease to have effect if the contract is terminated as a result of fault on the part of the agency.  Whilst not strictly necessary, such a provision may remove a source of spurious argument if this unfortunate event happens - as sometimes it does.

 

In general, you should expect all other contract terms to pass three tests:

 

First, they be as fair and balanced as is consistent with the nature of the term and the contract itself.

 

Secondly, they should be objective and not subjective - the effect of the term should not be dependent on the other party's whim.

 

And finally, they should be easy to understand, without you having to engage a lawyer tell you what they mean - if you don't understand a term, don't accept it!

15th September 2000


I'd really appreciate your feedback on this FAQ - so mail me and tell me what you think of it, if it's been useful to you, or let me know of any specific problem you have where I may be able to help.

[Return to Top]

[Return to Roger Sinclair's 'Welcome' page]


No liability is accepted for any inaccuracy in the information in these pages - see full disclaimer

© Roger Sinclair roger@egos.co.uk 2000 - All rights reserved - see full copyright details


Disclaimer of liability:

The information on these pages is provided free and for information only, and is provided 'as is'. Whilst believed to be correct, it is in no way comprehensive. It is provided for your interest only and is not intended to be relied on as formal legal advice. The posting of information on these pages is not intended to create a lawyer-client relationship, and you should not act or rely on this information without seeking professional advice. No liability is accepted therefore for any errors, or for any losses that may be incurred if it is relied on.

[Return to Top]


Copyright details:

You may read these pages on-line, and download them to read later, for your own personal use.
This copyright notice must appear on every page that you print from here.
You must not redistribute these pages or any part of them in any form or medium without first obtaining my consent.
You are welcome to set up links to this website from others.

[Return to Top]

[Return to Roger Sinclair's 'Welcome' page]