Case 1601435/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Hollis v MVRRS Group Limited (Dissolved) and 2 others — 2024
- Case reference
- 1601435/2022
- Decision date
- 30 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms R Hollis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing, Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan determined the identity of Ms R Hollis's employer at the material time. The tribunal held that she was employed by Wales England Care Ltd, trading as Wales England Training and WE Care, from 9 September 2019 until termination of employment on 28 July 2022. It found that the recruitment process, the offer of employment to Wales England Care Ltd, the statement of terms, and the day-to-day control exercised over her work established that employment relationship.
The tribunal rejected the contention that MVRRS Training Limited was her employer. Although her wages were paid through an account in that company's name and she later completed redundancy paperwork naming MVRRS Training Limited after it entered creditors' voluntary liquidation, the tribunal found that those features did not alter the underlying employment relationship. It also treated MVRRS Group Limited as a dissolved company with no role in the proceedings and dismissed it as a named respondent. The judgment did not decide the merits of any substantive dismissal or discrimination claims, which were left for a later hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal held that Ms Hollis was employed by Wales England Care Ltd from 9 September 2019 to 28 July 2022 and not by MVRRS Training Limited; substantive dismissal and discrimination claims were left for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- mutuality of obligation
- control
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.