PGMOL loses Supreme Court battle with HMRC over referees’ employment status

The body that oversees England’s top football referees has lost a Supreme Court battle with HM Revenue & Customs over whether part-time officials should be classed as employees.

Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) manages referees in charge of fixtures at the highest levels of English football, including the Premier League, English Football League, Women’s Super League and Women’s Championship.

It has been in a legal battle with HMRC for several years over whether some of its officials should be deemed as employees who are contracted for individual games, with the PGMOL claiming they were only contracted for services and therefore classed as self-employed.

Referees are paid fees for games as well as other sums including travel expenses and performance bonuses, with HMRC arguing that the PGMOL had sufficient “control” over the officials for them to be classed as employees and it was therefore obliged to deduct income tax and national insurance from money paid.

In a judgment backed by Lord Hodge, Lord Leggatt, Lord Stephens and Lady Rose, Lord Richards said that the Court of Appeal was “correct to say the combination of contractual obligations imposed on referees as to their conduct during an engagement” was capable of “giving PGMOL a framework of control” for employment purposes.

The legal battle centred around the PGMOL’s National Group of referees – who now mostly officiate in League 1, League 2 and the National League as well as cup competitions – in the 2014-15 and 2015-16 tax years.

Lord Richards said that the officials – who refereed alongside full-time jobs – were usually appointed to a weekend’s matches by the PGMOL at the start of that week, but could back out for reasons such as injury, illness or a work commitment.

He continued that at a hearing in April last year, HMRC argued that the “terms on which the National Group referees are engaged”, which included “a fitness protocol, a match day procedures document and a code of conduct”, meant they had “control” over, and a “mutual obligation” with, referees.

The PGMOL – which was set up in 2001 to improve refereeing standards in England – said that if the referee did not attend the match, no fee would be paid, meaning there was no “mutual obligation” and therefore they could not be classed as employees.

But in a 26-page judgment, Lord Richards said: “PGMOL submitted that no mutual obligations existed because both the referee and PGMOL were free to cancel the engagement, without penalty, at any time before the referee arrived at the ground.

“But it does not follow from the right of either party to cancel the engagement without penalty that, while the contract remained in being, the parties were not under mutual obligations to each other.

“On the contrary, those mutual obligations existed from the time of acceptance of the match, unless the engagement was terminated.”

He added: “In my judgment, it is clear that the individual engagements of referees to officiate at matches satisfied the test of mutuality of obligation, which is a necessary but not sufficient condition to the existence of a contract of employment.”

The Supreme Court sent the case back to a lower court to decide whether the officials were employees as a result of its decision.

Following the judgment, an HMRC spokesperson said: “We welcome this decision, which confirms our position on employment status law and maintains clarity for taxpayers, employers and agents.”

PGMOL declined to comment.