Why was a student working as a freelance security guard legally an employee?

The worker was 21 and studying law full-time when he entered the first agreement in October 2022. He initially performed supervisory services and later began security training and worked under an agreement with the related security company. 

He received standard contractual terms. The Court found no evidence of meaningful negotiation over the initial agreement or remuneration. 

The companies argued that he had two clients. The Court found that the relationships were successive: the first agreement ended when the later agreement took over. There was insufficient evidence of other clients for the relevant work or of an independently developed business serving a wider market.

Security workers used electronic tags to record visits to checkpoints. The security company required this system and could see when and how often particular areas had been visited. 

The Court also examined daily instructions specifying tasks and the times at which they had to be performed. 

The companies argued that work requirements originated with the end client. The Court found that the security company itself possessed and exercised the power to direct performance.

The worker supplied his availability and accepted allocated shifts through a scheduling system. 

A 72-hour arrangement allowed accepted shifts to be returned. The Court did not find that this arrangement had ceased to exist. It did find that a company message strongly discouraged its use and referred to charging costs when shifts were returned. 

Substitution was not entirely excluded, provided the replacement held the required qualifications. However, the later contract contained no express substitution clause, and the file lacked evidence showing how often substitution or shift returns actually occurred.

Most operational security work was performed by people engaged as freelancers. The relatively small group of employees worked mainly in the office. 

The companies relied on differences between employees and freelancers, including participation in company activities. The Court considered that comparison weak because the groups performed different work. 

The Court also explained that organisational integration had to be understood in the context of this staffing model. Company outings and Christmas gifts provided little assistance in deciding the nature of the operational relationship. 

The security company ended the relationship immediately after the worker left the site during a shift to obtain paracetamol. 

The Court found immediate dismissal disproportionate in the circumstances. Actual danger had not been established, the worker’s explanation for leaving had been insufficiently rebutted, and the alleged duration of his absence remained disputed. 

The Court accepted that leaving the site was unacceptable and could justify a sanction. It found insufficient justification for choosing immediate dismissal. 

The March 2025 decision left the calculations open. The November 2025 final decision awarded: 

• €6,464.20 gross in outstanding holiday allowance, compensation for unused annual leave and a year-end payment. 

• €5,913.76 gross in compensation for the invalid dismissal. 

• Procedural costs. 

The statutory increase for late payment was refused. 

The Court used the agreed freelance rates as the starting point for determining remuneration in the circumstances of this case. It did not accept that reclassification automatically permitted substitution of the lower collective-agreement rates proposed by the companies. The final order also addressed the companies’ payroll-tax obligations. 

• Assess the working relationship independently of student status, business registration and tax arrangements. 

• Examine what monitoring systems reveal about control over daily performance. 

• Keep evidence showing whether substitution and shift-return arrangements are usable in practice. 

• Assess each relationship individually, even where most operational workers are engaged as freelancers. 

• Review employment status before ending a disputed freelance relationship. 

• Calculate remuneration and compensation separately, using the agreements, payment records and applicable legal rules.