Case 1400776/2024 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr P Skeens (2) Mrs A Skeens v Skeens Construction Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 1400776/2024
- Decision date
- 30 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
(1) Mr P Skeens (2) Mrs A Skeens
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants brought claims for redundancy payments against Skeens Construction Ltd, which was in creditors voluntary liquidation, and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade. The hearing took place by video at Bristol on 17 January 2025; the First Claimant appeared in person, the Second Claimant did not attend, the First Respondent did not attend, and the Second Respondent was represented by a lay representative.
The tribunal dismissed the redundancy payment claims. It found that the claimants were not employees of the First Respondent within s. 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also found that, because the claims had been brought more than 6 months but less than 12 months after the relevant date, it was not just and equitable for them to proceed under s. 164.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal dismissed the redundancy payment claims because the claimants were neither employees of the First Respondent under s. 230 Employment Rights Act 1996, and it was not just and equitable for the claims to proceed under s. 164 after being brought more than 6 months, but less than 12 months, after the relevant date. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s. 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s. 164 Employment Rights Act 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.