Thank you. I think what the previous solicitor is saying is that the notice in the original contract applies because in effect the contract has simply been rolling over consistently over the last 2.5 years and hence, you are still entitled to the same notice.
Whether the previous 12 weeks preceding termination would be a good measure or not would depend on the nature of the work and whether it was seasonal. The previous 12 weeks may not be representative of the average situation. Subject to that, the previous 12 weeks would be quite reasonable. If the work is seasonal, then it would be the previous 12 weeks of the same period last year.
I don’t know whether the work that you were doing was just labour you may not necessarily be awarded full amount of the notice because you haven’t actually done the work. You would claim the full amount and it would be for the defendant to submit to the court that you not entitled to the full invoice value because you haven’t had the burden of doing the work. However, that is for the other side to raise with the judge.
There are actually several issues here which makes the case law matter more involved. Whether the previous notice period does apply in a rolling over contract. Is it rolling over contract or a new contract? Whether you are employed or self-employed in reality regardless of the terms stated in any contract. Whether the terms of the original contract excluded rolling over or whether it genuinely was for a fixed term. What is the value of it?
Hence, getting the maximum amount of caselaw out of this is going to take several hours. A barrister’s opinion is probably going to cost you in the region of £600 or a little more plus VAT and that would give you the caselaw that you are looking for.However, you would not recover those costs.