These were the no-holds-barred words used by the Employment Tribunal in its judgment today that Uber drivers are not self-employed.
The Tribunal was very sceptical (a word it repeated several times) of Uber's case that it is simply a technology platform with no material working relationship with its drivers. The Tribunal found that Uber's documentation resorted to "fictions, twisted language and even brand new terminology" in its "description of itself and its analysis of the legal relationships between Uber's companies, the drivers and the passengers".
The Judge even strikingly concluded that the "grimly loyal evidence" of Uber's UK General Manager suggested that she "doth protest too much".
The judgment means that Uber drivers are entitled to workers' rights including paid holiday and minimum wage. As workers they will have certain statutory protections including protection from discrimination and whistleblower retaliation.
The case could have far-reaching consequences for other 'gig' economy businesses and delivery companies such as Hermes, whose practices have recently been the subject of much press attention.
This is not the end, though. Expect this case to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court as Uber invests huge resources in defending its low-cost, low-burden business model.
Drivers for Uber have won a landmark case after employment tribunal judges ruled that they were not self-employed and should be paid the national living wage. The case, taken by two workers, could open up the technology firm to claims from all of its 40,000 driver in the UK, and force other companies with tens of thousands of workers in the so-called gig economy to review the way they employ staff. Uber said that it will appeal against the finding. The ride hailing app had argued that it is a tech firm and the drivers are independent self-employed contractors who can choose where and when they work. As a result, they were not entitled to rights granted to workers, including holiday pay and the national minimum wage.