Ms M De Pedro Almela v Smileright Dencare Limited — 2020

At the hearing on 24 February 2020, Employment Judge Harfield clarified that the claimant was seeking 6 days' pay said to have been lost when her working days were reduced from 4 days to 3 days a week, and 8 days' pay said to relate to an unpaid notice period. The tribunal recorded that the respondent contended she was a self-employed contractor rather than a worker or employee, and that the written agreement allowed her in certain circumstances to appoint a locum or assign the agreement to another dentist.

The claimant was asked whether her case was that the written agreement did not reflect the true position, or that she was at least a worker. She said that was not her case. She accepted that she was self-employed and said she thought she was owed sums for breach of that self-employed contract. On that basis, the tribunal explained that an unauthorised deduction from wages claim could only be brought by a worker or employee within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the unauthorised deduction from wages complaint because the claimant had conceded that she was not a worker or employee. It also noted that, to the extent there was any claim for breach of contract, that would appear to fall to the county court rather than the Employment Tribunal. The claim was therefore struck out on a jurisdictional basis, and the tribunal stated that there had been no judicial determination of the substance of the claim and no dismissal judgment under Rule 52.

The tribunal did not assess the preparation time order at that hearing. It directed the claimant to provide a further schedule identifying the work or time she said was wasted or duplicated in preparing for two hearings, with the respondent to comment, and for the matter then to return to Employment Judge Frazer for consideration of the reconsideration application and, if relevant, quantification.